David Hackett has a broad-based appellate practice in which he has prosecuted and defended numerous appeals and writ petitions, and briefed dispositive pre-trial and post-trial motions, on a variety of topics. They include: agency and partnership, arbitration, civil procedure, contracts, constitutional law, employment, environmental law, evidence, health care, marital property, probate, real estate, state and federal regulations, and tax, among many others. David has also developed particular expertise representing secured commercial creditors in appeals regarding California’s unique real estate foreclosure procedures, the law of suretyship and guaranty, the “one action” rule, and the anti-deficiency law.
David received his law degree from Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, where he was the valedictorian of his graduating class. He then served as a law clerk to Judge Gary A. Feess of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, and to Judge Alfred T. Goodwin of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Between clerkships, he was an associate in the Los Angeles office of Latham & Watkins, where his practice included complex civil litigation, international arbitration, internal corporate investigations, and white-collar defense matters.
David received his undergraduate degree from UCLA, and he is still a dedicated Bruins fan. One of his prized possessions is an autographed copy of Coach John Wooden’s Pyramid of Success.
Some of David’s recent appellate victories include:
Kanno v. Marwit Capital Partners II, L.P. (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 987
Court comprehensively analyzes the governing principles and application of the parol evidence rule under both California and Delaware law
Court comprehensively analyzes the governing principles and application of the parol evidence rule under both California and Delaware law
The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment in favor of GMSR’s client in a multi-million-dollar contract dispute. The Court held that the parol evidence rules in both California and Delaware permitted the trial court to receive evidence of—and to enforce—an oral stock redemption agreement.
Novak v. Fay (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 329
Court establishes procedure for enforcing attorney liens against decedents’ estates
Court establishes procedure for enforcing attorney liens against decedents’ estates
In this first-impression case, the Court of Appeal harmonized some apparently conflicting laws and ruled that the holder of an attorney lien need not file a creditor’s claim in the probate estate of the deceased client.
We welcome your inquiry. However, sending us an email does not create an attorney-client relationship. For that reason, you should not send us any kind of confidential information. Until we have agreed to represent you, we cannot be obligated to keep it confidential.