Jeffrey M. Goldman
Jeffrey Goldman is an associate with Pepper Hamilton LLP, resident in the Orange County and Los Angeles offices.
Mr. Goldman concentrates his practice in commercial litigation, labor and employment matters (including wage and hour actions), intellectual property matters, construction disputes, and class actions. He has represented clients in labor and employment matters in a variety of fields, including construction, retail/fashion, medical device companies, and professional recruiting companies. He has represented companies and individuals, ranging from Fortune 500 entities to small business owners. Further, Mr. Goldman has tried cases in California’s federal and state courts, including both jury and bench trials, as well as handling administrative actions before the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement.
Mr. Goldman’s representative cases include:
Mr. Goldman also has published several articles including:
- Faulkner v. ADT Security Services, Inc., et al., No. C 11-00968 JSW, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50993 (N.D. Cal. May 12, 2011) (granting motion to dismiss putative class action alleging that ADT’s practice of recording phone calls violated California Penal Code sec. 632)
- Auburn University v. International Business Machines Corp., Civil No. 11-cv-399 L (POR), 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34230 (S.D. Cal. March 30, 2011) (denying Auburn’s motion to enforce a subpoena against third party, and later granting client’s attorneys’ fees incurred to oppose said motion)
- Neborsky v. Valley Forge Composite Techs., et al., Case No. 13-CV-2307-MMA (BGS), 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62147 (S.D. Cal. April 28, 2014) (granting motion to dismiss securities class action complaint alleging violations of Rule 10b-5 and 20(a)).
Mr. Goldman was selected for inclusion on the 2012, 2013 and 2014 Southern California Rising Stars list.
- “North American South Asian Bar Association Conference” (co-author), Pepper Hamilton LLP Diversity Matters, Vol. 2013, Issue 2
- “Newly Enacted State Laws Will Affect Companies Operating in California,” Pepper@Work (December 11, 2012)
- “Duty Bound,” Los Angeles Daily Journal (September 2, 2008)
- “Decision May Shift Costs of Electronic Document Review” (co-author), Los Angeles Daily Journal (March 30, 2005)
- “Addicted to Prada?: United States v. Roach, Shopping Addiction, Significantly Reduced Mental Capacity, and United States Sentencing Guideline Section 5K2.13,” Gonzaga Law Review, 39 GONZ. L. REV. 197
- “Avoiding Blurred Lines: The Computation of Damages in Rule 10b-5 Securities Class Action Lawsuits in the Ninth Circuit and a Proposal for a More Sensible System,” Hastings Business Law Journal, 2 HASTINGS BUS. L. J. 261
- “Protecting Gays From the Government’s Crosshairs: A Reevaluation of the Ninth Circuit’s Treatment of Gays Under the Federal Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause Following Lawrence v. Texas,” University of San Francisco Law Review, 39 U.S.F.L. REV. 617.
Mr. Goldman is admitted to practice in California, as well as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the U.S. District Courts for the Eastern, Northern, Southern and Central District of California.
B.A. 2001 University of Wisconsin
J.D. 2004 University of California, Los Angeles, School of Law; member, Order of the Coif
Admitted to practice in California