David Harris is senior counsel at the Firm. He has successfully represented clients both at trial and on appeal in state and federal courts. His practice is focused primarily on complex commercial litigation and intellectual property disputes.
Prior to joining Stubbs Alderton and Markiles in 2016, David was an associate at the firm Crone Hawxhurst LLP—a spinoff of Quinn Emanuel Urquart & Sullivan, LLP that specializes in representing Fortune 500 companies at trial. Before that, David worked at Toberoff & Associates, PC, a litigation boutique that represents authors, artists and their heirs in copyright disputes.
David received his J.D. from the Yale Law School in 2006, where he was an editor on the Yale Law Journal. After law school, David clerked for Chief Justice Dana Fabe of the Alaska Supreme Court. He is a member of the California Bar, and is admitted to practice before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and also the District Courts for the Central and Northern Districts of California.
practice & experience
- Obtained summary judgment in favor of the client, a leading designer of “mega-coasters” and cutting-edge theme park rides. The plaintiff, represented by one of the country’s top antitrust plaintiff’s firms, sought nearly $20 million in damages for alleged antitrust violations. The trial court agreed that the plaintiff could not establish antitrust injury or damages. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision on appeal.
- Obtained summary judgment in favor of the client, a Fortune 100 tech company. The plaintiff sought nearly $10 million in damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained as a result of the client’s negligence. The Court agreed that the plaintiff could not establish negligence as a matter of law based on the little-known “completed and accepted doctrine.”
- Successfully litigated a malicious prosecution case against a number of attorneys on behalf of the client, a leading energy drink manufacturer. After their anti-SLAPP motion, anti-SLAPP appeal and motion for summary judgment were defeated, the defendants agreed on the eve of trial to have judgment entered against them and in favor of the client.
- Successfully moved to dismiss a complaint aimed at depriving the heirs of a world famous musician from reclaiming their father’s copyrights. The trial court agreed that the plaintiff did not have standing to bring its federal copyright claims and could not, as a matter of law, succeed on its state law claims. As a result, the trial court ordered the plaintiff to pay the heirs’ attorney’s fees and costs.