ABTL Report - Fall 2026 Edition - Flipbook - Page 1
SPRING
FALL 2026
2024
A SEA CHANGE? C.C.P. § 1283.05
AMENDMENT BROADENS DISCOVERY
RIGHTS FOR LITIGANTS
There areINa ARBITRATION
lot of articles and
programs
judges’
“petCalifornia
peeves.”
Effectiveabout
January
1, 2025,
1
While
it
can
be
useful
for
lawyers
to
Code of Civil Procedure section
know judges’
preferences,
sometimes
1283.05
was amended
to provide
that,
the
pet-peeves
programs
make
judges
in arbitrations conducted pursuant to the
sound whiny
and ungrateful.
“I hate is
it
California
Arbitration
Act, discovery
when lawyers
tooextent
muchastime”;
“It
available
to thetake
same
it would
drives
crazy whencivil
attorneys
be
in me
a California
trial won’t
court.
answer commentators
my questions”;have
“No described
one ever
Some
readsamendment
my local, local
rules.”
We are
this
as a “sea
change”
in
Michael Alfera
very
fortunate
to
have
the
opportunity
California arbitration law, though at
to servethere
as judges;
complaining
aboutauthority
it makesaddressing
us look like
present
is no published
California
the
we
do
not
remember
how
fortunate
we
are.
Also,
I
kind
of
effects of this change. This article explores the amended statute
likeissues
lawyers
(I was its
one,
you know).
I respect
they do,
and
affecting
application,
including
thewhat
incorporation
and
(through
associations
the ABTL)
have
made
of
ADR
provider
rules, the like
applicability
of the
FAA,
thelasting
effect
friendships
with
many
lawyers.
of choice-of-law clauses, and retroactivity. While many of these
Continued on Page 8
So this article is not about pet peeves.
It’s not about
1 “common mistakes on appeal,” the “top 10 ways attorneys
All undesignated statutory references are to the California Code of Civil
Procedure.
can forfeit an issue,” or “do’s and don’ts from the judicial
perspective.” I decided to write about things that, in my
INSIDE
A Sea Change? C.C.P. § 1283.05 Amendment Broadens Discovery
Rights For Litigants In Arbitration
by Michael Alfera
p.1
Statements of Decision: New Rules Are Coming; Learn Them
p.1
Now by Hon. John L. Segal and Stefan Love
President’s Message
by Amy Lucas
p.2
Navigating FINRA Arbitration: Lessons From The Trenches
p.3
by Kathy Huang, Gillian Clow, and Robia Amjad
Overview of the Workers’ Compensation System
by Brad Pauley and Emma Wine
p.6
Young Lawyers Division Update
by Sam Donohue,
Andrew Figueras and Jay Ettinger
p.19
STATEMENTS OF DECISION: NEW RULES
ARE COMING; LEARN THEM NOW
Pretend it’s January 2027. You
just
a three-day
court 昀椀rm,
trial.
As昀椀nished
a lawyer
at a judge
plaintiff’s
litigation.
The 昀椀rst
might retire
Should
you request
a statement are
of
my
friends
and colleagues
often
surprised to learn that we do
decision?
division, or the 昀椀rst judge might be
business litigation. They are even
If you
answered,
depends
on
more
surprised
when Itthey
昀椀nd out
whether
I
win
or
lose—you’re
wrong,
that we do our cases for businesses
anda you’re
about fee.
to forfeit
on
contingency
While your
our
request.
on January
昀椀rm
is Because
somewhat
unique 1,in2027,
this
Hon. John L. Segal
regard,
representing
the rules
governing businesses
statements on
of
a decision
contingency
fee
has
been
both
will change.
professionally and 昀椀nancially rewarding. We have had
On real-estate
that date, the
current versions
of
the pleasure of representing
development
昀椀rms,
Code of
Civilhospitals,
Procedure
sections 632
tech start-ups, toy innovators,
large
entertainment
writers and producers, and
and 664
even(Old
insurance
companies
as
§ 632, Old
§ 664) will
plaintiffs on a variety of different
matters.
These
cases
present
be replaced by new versions (New
unique challenges and opportunities
and
§ 632, Newfor§ plaintiffs’
664). The昀椀rms
Judicial
require creative, “outside-the-box”
strategy
and
thinking.
Council will also enact new rules of
This article examines some
and practice
courthighlights
to implement
the new pointers
statutes,
for lawyers who litigate business
cases
on
contingency.
replacing the current rule 3.1590.
Stefan C. Love
(See New § 632, subd. (h)(1).)
Firsttalk
Question:
Why would
a business
everdifferent
want to hire
Let’s
about what’s
the same
and what’s
in thea
lawyer
to litigate Supreme
its case on
a contingency-fee
basis?
There
new
rules.
The
California
Court
has con昀椀rmed that
a trial
judge
are as many reasons as to why a business may want to choose
Effect fee
on appeal.
a Same:
contingency
law 昀椀rm as there are different kinds of
businesses. For example, a business may seek out a 昀椀rm that
The most important thing about statements of decision
has had past success on a particular kind of case in a situation
remains
the same:
theyand
mean
yourjust
andhappens
your opponent’s
that
is similar
to what
its own,
thefor昀椀rm
to be a
appeal.
Statements
of
decision
matter
because
of
twoone
equal
and
contingency fee 昀椀rm. That happens more than
might
opposite rules:
think.
1. end
“‘[T]he
must infer,
followingthea
At the
of reviewing
the day, court
one point
is obvious:
decisionmakers
for trial
the court
business
know made
they every
must factual
obtain
bench trial, that the
impliedly
the
bestnecessary
possible representation
is feasibly within
their
昀椀nding
to support its that
decision’”—the
doctrine
of
itself, the court should inform the parties,
solicit brie昀椀ng,
and
Continued
on Page 12
