Keesal, Young & Logan regularly represents its clients in the state and federal appellate courts, including the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, all levels of state appellate courts in California, Washington, and Alaska and the United States Supreme Court.  The firm’s lawyers have briefed and argued hundreds of appeals and petitions for writs covering a broad range of substantive issues:  securities and financial services, professional malpractice, alternative dispute resolution, arbitration, class actions, employment, governmental, admiralty and environmental.  The firm incorporates its philosophy of practical lawyering in its appellate practice by utilizing its extensive appellate experience to enhance the presentation of cases at the trial level and by critically evaluating cases on appeal to make prudent recommendations regarding the appellate process.  Among the significant appeals the firm has handled are the following:

Andrews v. Valdez,
40 Cal. App. 4th 492 (1995) [writ of mandate issued in favor of our client]

Berry v. Souza,
564 F.2d 1347 (9th Cir. 1977) [summary judgment in our client’s favor on Reg. T issues affirmed by Ninth Circuit]

Carrott v. Shearson,
724 F.2d 821 (9th Cir. 1984) [District Court’s dismissal in favor of our client affirmed by Ninth Circuit]

Chopp Computer v. USA and PaineWebber,
5 F.3d 1344 (9th Cir. 1993) [summary judgment for our client affirmed by Ninth Circuit]

City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (City of South Gate)
50 Cal. App. 4th 598, 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 878 (1997) [Reversed overruling of a demurrer on a writ of mandate allowing the $2.4 billion Alameda Corridor project to proceed.]

Clifton v. Ulis,
17 Cal. 3d 99 (1976) [California Supreme Court made important evidentiary decision in favor of our client]

Cohen v. Wedbush, Noble, Cook, Inc.,
841 F.2d 282 (9th Cir. 1988) [District Court’s order compelling arbitration affirmed by Ninth Circuit]

Dearborn v. Mar Ship Operations, Inc.,
113 F.3d 995 (9th Cir. 1997) [summary judgment for our client affirmed by Ninth Circuit]

Downs v. Prudential,
202 Cal. App.3d 616 (1986) [denial of motion to compel arbitration reversed]

Franklin v. Kaypro Corp.,
884 F.2d 1222 (9th Cir. 1989) [leading Ninth Circuit case on settlements]

Garrett v. Merrill Lynch,
7 F.3d 882 (9th Cir. 1993) [Ninth Circuit affirmed confirmation of arbitration award]

In re Glacier Bay,
71 F.3d 1447 (9th Cir. 1997) [significant issues under FTCA and Federal Water Pollution Control Act]

Mago v. Shearson Lehman Hutton,
956 F.2d 932 (9th Cir. 1992) [Title VII claims arbitrable]

Marchese v. Shearson,
822 F.2d 876 (9th Cir. 1987) [Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal of class action against our client]

Mars v. Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc.,
231 Cal. App. 3d 1608 (1991) [trial court dismissal of clearing firm affirmed on appeal]

Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc. v. Superior Court,
201 Cal. App. 3d 924 (1988) [in case of first impression, Court of Appeal granted petition for writ of mandate staying all proceedings pursuant to C.C.P. § 916]

Shearson Loeb Rhoades, Inc. v. Quinard,
751 F.2d 1102 (9th Cir. 1985) [double costs and attorneys’ fees awarded to our client]

Travelers v. Vessel Sam Houston,
26 F.3d 895 (9th Cir. 1994) [District Court’s summary judgment for our client affirmed on appeal]

Unocal v. U.S.
222 F.3d 528 (9th Cir. 2000) [jury verdict in favor of our client affirmed on appeal]

U.S. v. Hyundai,
172 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir 1999) [multiple matters of first impression regarding Oil Pollution Act]

Winet v. Price,
4 Cal. App. 4th 1159 (1992) [Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal of legal malpractice action against our client]

For additional information, please contact: