Jonathan H. Eisenman


Jonathan Eisenman’s practice focuses on civil appeals and writs, but he hasn’t been an appellate attorney for his entire legal career. With a background in federal civil litigation, and having clerked for judges in both the United States district and circuit courts, Jon brings to his appellate work an end-to-end perspective on litigating a case.

Jon’s experience runs the gamut from multimillion-dollar commercial tort and contract disputes, to cases involving pressing constitutional questions, to disputes over covenants encumbering residential real property. Over the course of his career, Jon has worked on matters in the United States Supreme Court, various United States courts of appeals and district courts, and several states’ courts of appeals and courts of last resort.  He currently concentrates on matters pending in the California Court of Appeal, the California Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court.

Jon received his law degree with honors from The University of Texas School of Law, where he was an associate editor of the Texas Law Review.  He practiced for several years with the litigation and appellate groups in the Washington, D.C. office of an international law firm, after which he clerked for Judge Mary H. Murguia of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and for Judges Virginia A. Phillips and David T. Bristow of the United States District Court for the Central District of California. He is currently a lawyer representative from the Central District of California to the Ninth Circuit Judicial Conference.  Jon holds an undergraduate degree with high honors in religion from Dartmouth College.  He is also a five-time Jeopardy! champion.

High Impact Wins


Eleanor Licensing LLC v. Classic Recreations LLC (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 599

Reaffirming that the statute of limitations to quiet title does not run against a plaintiff in possession

Read Case Details

Wilson v. Southern California Edison Co. (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 786

Alleged interference with the property rights of non-plaintiffs is generally irrelevant in proving a private nuisance claim

Read Case Details

Speaking and Involvement

Back Out Of The Memory Hole? The California Supreme Court's New Publication Rule, ASCDC San Diego Litigation Conference