David E. Hackett

Biography

David Hackett has a broad-based appellate practice in which he has briefed and argued numerous appeals, writ petitions, and dispositive pre-trial and post-trial motions on a variety of topics, including agency and partnership, anti-SLAPP motions, arbitration, civil procedure, contracts, constitutional law, employment, environmental law, evidence, family law, health care, probate, real estate, state and federal regulations, and tax, among many others.  David has also developed expertise representing secured commercial creditors in appeals regarding California’s unique real estate foreclosure procedures and the law of suretyship and guaranty.

David received his law degree from Loyola Law School, 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 appellate victories include:

• Baral v. Schnitt (Jan. 28, 2022, B298050) 2022 WL 263108 (nonpub. opn.) – Court of Appeal reversed jury’s compensatory and punitive damages awards and trial court’s denial of JNOV, ordering entry of defense judgment on all business tort claims.
• Ray v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. (9th Cir. 2021) 2021 WL 4902357 – Ninth Circuit affirmed judgment, rejecting plaintiffs’ belated effort to change insurance bad faith theories.
• Morgan v. J-M Manufacturing Company, Inc. (2021) 60 Cal.App.5th 1078 – Court of Appeal reversed $15 million punitive damages award in asbestos exposure suit.
• Southern California School of Theology v. Claremont Graduate University (2021) 60 Cal.App.5th 1 – Court of Appeal reversed judgment against the Claremont Colleges, holding that the doctrine of equitable servitudes required full enforcement of their property purchase rights worth more than $30 million.
• Kanno v. Marwit Capital Partners II, L.P. (2017) 18 Cal.App.5th 987 – Court of Appeal affirmed judgment, comprehensively analyzed the parol evidence rule’s governing principles and application, and complimented “all counsel on the excellent briefing and oral argument in this case.”