Did you know law students can be certified to argue cases before the federal Court of Appeal?  Neither did I, yet there I found myself, a twenty-four year old, third year law student arguing before a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal panel including Judge Kozinski, known as one of the toughest, most intellectual and brightest judges to ever sit on a Ninth Circuit appellate panel.  Perhaps I should move back in time just a little to explain what occurred.  I was a note and comment editor for the Loyola Law School (Los Angeles) law review and had written and published an article on the then relatively unknown issue of judicial estoppel.  As it turned out, the law firm where I was clerking had the issue of judicial estoppel arise in a client’s case.  None of the attorneys in the firm were familiar with the area of law and so I was asked to research the fairly novel issue and it was also suggested because of my expertise, that I write my law review article on the topic as well.  The client agreed that given my expertise in the area, he would allow me to be certified as a law student and argue his case before the Ninth Circuit.  Naturally I was nervous, but I remember every second of my first appellate oral argument.  The judges pulled no punches and treated me every bit as if I was an appellate attorney with 30 years experience—and I held my own.  It was then I was certain that appellate practice would be a significant portion of my law practice.

​

    Since that day in late 1996, I have always loved the process of appellate work.  I was fortunate that my law review article was cited by several California appellate courts and actually helped form the law of judicial estoppel in California.  I still remember the excitement as I learned for the first time that the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the case of Snowney v. Harrah’s Entertainment, Inc. (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1054 Cert. Denied (2005) 126 S.Ct. 659, where I successfully argued and prevailed in the landmark case where the California Supreme Court (7-0) created the doctrine of  Internet based personal jurisdiction in California.  I was equally as excited to argue Apple, Inc. v. Superior Court (Krescent) (2013) 56 Cal.4th 128 (yes, that Apple), albeit the 4-3 decision, unfortunately did not go my way.  Having been admitted in 1997 I have been involved in dozens of appellate matters before the California Court of Appeal and Supreme Court and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal, including six published opinions to my name.  I presently have a matter pending before the United States Supreme Court and am hoping they will agree to take the case shortly.

​

I continue to represent clients in their appeals, and given my familiarity with the very complex rules of appellate procedure often represent the clients of other attorneys who wish to hire an attorney specifically to navigate the appellate process.  I am licensed to practice before the California Supreme and Appellate Courts, the Ninth Circuit of Appeal and the United States Supreme Court.  If you are an attorney (or in some circumstances, a currently unrepresented litigant) in need of consultation regarding understanding and engaging in the appellate process, Schreiber & Schreiber, Inc., is here to assist you with any civil law appellate matters in California or the Ninth Circuit.

​

    Eric A. Schreiber is a partner of the law firm of Schreiber & Schreiber, Inc., and is a licensed California attorney (SBN 194851).  This article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice or the creation of an attorney-client relationship.  Copyright 2020 all rights reserved.

​