Eric A. Amador is a partner in the firm who has been practicing for over three decades.  Prior to joining the firm, he was an associate, then partner, at Bronson, Bronson & McKinnon LLP.

Eric has an extensive background in insurance coverage, having been involved in the preparation of more than one hundred coverage opinions involving a wide range of both first- and third-party aviation and non-aviation policies.  Eric’s coverage opinions have most frequently involved analysis of California law; however, he has also prepared coverage analyses under the laws of numerous other jurisdictions.

In addition to coverage opinion work, Eric has also represented insurers in a number of declaratory relief actions.

Additionally, Eric has been substantially or exclusively responsible for handling over fifty appeals before the California Courts of Appeal and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals-- the vast majority of which resolved favorably, and eight of which resulted in published opinions.  Eric’s appellate engagements have included the following:

  • Represented borrower in action before the California Supreme Court, which reversed summary judgment in favor of lender and held that parol evidence rule does not bar evidence of fraudulent promises at variance with terms of writing, unanimously overruling its own earlier decision that had stood for over 75 years.
  • Obtained summary judgment and appellate affirmance in favor of air ambulance service in action involving multiple-fatality helicopter crash, on basis that decedent was “special employee” of service, making worker’s compensation heirs’ exclusive remedy.
  • Obtained affirmance of trial court finding that alter ego doctrine did not apply to entities associated with farmer in breach of contract action.
  • Obtained affirmance of summary judgment in favor of landlord in action arising out of an accident in apartment complex exercise facility on basis that liability waiver was controlling.
  • Obtained Ninth Circuit affirmance of judgment in favor of employer in sexual harassment and wrongful termination action.
  • Obtained partial affirmance of order directing California Insurance Commissioner to accept late claims against insolvent insurer.
  • Obtained affirmance of judgment dismissing bottled water distributor in indemnity action on basis of lack of minimum contacts necessary for jurisdiction.
  • Obtained reversal of judgment against lessee in rescission action where trial court failed to issue statement of decision.
  • Obtained reversals of major contractual attorney’s fees awards against various business entities.
  • Obtained affirmance of summary judgment in favor of Veterans of Foreign Wars arising out of attack that occurred on VFW premises.
  • Obtained affirmance of judgment for worker’s compensation insurer in bad faith action -- appellate court rejecting insured’s contention that insurer had duty to pursue subrogation.
  • Obtained affirmance of judgment in favor automobile manufacturer and dealer in breach of warranty action

Eric’s appellate practice involves the direct handling of appeals, writ petitions and petitions for Supreme Court review and assisting trial counsel with appellate-related issues and post-trial motions.

Eric’s professional activities include the American Bar Association’s section on Tort and Insurance Practice, the State Bar of California’s section on Litigation, the Association of Southern California Defense Counsel and the Aviation Insurance Association.

Eric was born in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1963.  He received his A.B. degree in 1986 from the University of California, Berkeley.  He was a “Regent’s Scholar” at the University of California, Berkeley, and received his Juris Doctor degree from the University of California, Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco in 1989.  He received the American Jurisprudence Awards in Insurance Law and Appellate Practice.  He was admitted to the Bar of California in 1989.  He has been admitted to practice before all federal district courts in California, the federal district court for the District of Hawaii, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.