People: Kari Erickson Levine, Partner

Kari Erickson Levine

Partner

San Francisco
Direct: (415) 397-2823
Fax: (415) 397-8549
0

Kari Erickson Levine is a partner in the Complex Discrimination, Employment and Title III ADA Access Litigation Practice Groups.  She is resident in Seyfarth Shaw’s San Francisco office.  Ms. Levine joined Seyfarth in 1995 as a civil litigator.  Since 1998, Ms. Levine has focused on the representation of employers in all aspects of labor and employment law and litigation, including state and federal employment discrimination, wrongful discharge, FMLA, CFRA, ADA, Title III ADA access and wage and hour litigation.  Ms. Levine has a primary emphasis in her practice on defending employers sued in employment-related class actions and EEOC pattern or practice lawsuits brought in federal and state courts throughout the United States.  She has considerable trial experience, having begun her practice in 1990 as a Deputy District Attorney for the Los Angeles County District Attorneys Office.  Ms. Levine is dynamic, passionate and dedicated to teaming with her clients to judiciously, expeditiously and creatively resolve the issues they face in running their businesses.

Ms. Levine served as the Chair of the San Francisco Office’s Hiring Committee the last five years of her  tenure leading associate hiring from 1999 through 2009.  During this period she was also a member of the Firm’s Lawyer Development Committee (“LDC”).  Through the LDC, she partnered with dozens of associates who she mentored and closely monitored to ensure their personal and professional growth, development and success as lawyers and leaders.

Ms. Levine is currently the Chair of the San Francisco Pro Bono Committee.  Ms. Levine's pro bono activities include representation of Walden House (a San Francisco based non-profit organization founded in 1969 serving adults and children who face challenges including substance abuse, mental illness, homelessness and involvement in the criminal justice system).  Ms. Levine also is the outside General Counsel for pro bono client Dovetail Learning (a non-profit organization that created "Toolbox", a research-based, social and emotional learning curriculum that builds and fosters children's capacity for resilience and learning through development of personal awareness, self mastery, and empathy for others.  She is a Past President of the Board of Directors for Real Alternatives for Adolescents (RAFA).

Kari Erickson Levine is a partner in the Complex Discrimination, Employment and Title III ADA Access Litigation Practice Groups.  She is resident in Seyfarth Shaw’s San Francisco office.  Ms. Levine joined Seyfarth in 1995 as a civil litigator.  Since 1998, Ms. Levine has focused on the representation of employers in all aspects of labor and employment law and litigation, including state and federal employment discrimination, wrongful discharge, FMLA, CFRA, ADA, Title III ADA access and wage and hour litigation.  Ms. Levine has a primary emphasis in her practice on defending employers sued in employment-related class actions and EEOC pattern or practice lawsuits brought in federal and state courts throughout the United States.  She has considerable trial experience, having begun her practice in 1990 as a Deputy District Attorney for the Los Angeles County District Attorneys Office.  Ms. Levine is dynamic, passionate and dedicated to teaming with her clients to judiciously, expeditiously and creatively resolve the issues they face in running their businesses.

Ms. Levine served as the Chair of the San Francisco Office’s Hiring Committee the last five years of her  tenure leading associate hiring from 1999 through 2009.  During this period she was also a member of the Firm’s Lawyer Development Committee (“LDC”).  Through the LDC, she partnered with dozens of associates who she mentored and closely monitored to ensure their personal and professional growth, development and success as lawyers and leaders.

Ms. Levine is currently the Chair of the San Francisco Pro Bono Committee.  Ms. Levine's pro bono activities include representation of Walden House (a San Francisco based non-profit organization founded in 1969 serving adults and children who face challenges including substance abuse, mental illness, homelessness and involvement in the criminal justice system).  Ms. Levine also is the outside General Counsel for pro bono client Dovetail Learning (a non-profit organization that created "Toolbox", a research-based, social and emotional learning curriculum that builds and fosters children's capacity for resilience and learning through development of personal awareness, self mastery, and empathy for others.  She is a Past President of the Board of Directors for Real Alternatives for Adolescents (RAFA).

Education

  • J.D., University of California, Hastings College of the Law (1989)
  • B.A., University of California, San Diego (1987)

Admissions

  • California

Courts

  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern, Northern and Southern Districts of California

Affiliations

  • State Bar of California

Representative Engagements

Representative Cases

  • Alfredo Alvarez and Anthony Mariscal on their own behalf and all others similarly situated v. Fox Transport, Inc., We-R-Drayage, and McKesson Corp., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles – Central, obtained summary judgment, February 2006 (member of trial team.  Obtained joint employment doctrine summary judgment in class action alleging violation of the California Labor Code based upon defendant’s classification of drivers as exempt) 
  • Aoyama vs. L.A. General Construction, Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, (lead trial lawyer in construction defect/fraud action obtaining just under million-dollar jury verdict for her clients)
  • Cal Northern Petroleum Co., Inc. vs. Olson Investments, dba Tony Roma’s, Superior Court of California, County of Solano, August 1997 trial (lead trial lawyer responsible for piercing the corporate veil of a bankrupt corporation.  Obtained close to million dollar judgment for a product distributor against the defendant’s shareholders)
  • Cogent Communications v. Lau, Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Mateo, November 2003 jury trial (lead trial lawyer in prosecution of unfair competition action wherein current employee began a competing business; defense of cross-complaint for wages and commissions)
  • EEOC v. United Airlines, United States District Court, Western District of Washington, December 2010 (defended pattern and practice EEOC nationwide ADA discrimination class action arising out of reduced hour disability accommodation claims)
  • Eisenberg v. The Permanente Medical Group and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., United States District Court, Northern District of California, December 2011 (obtained summary judgment in action filed by former medical group doctor alleging discrimination in decision to remove privileges and credentials)
  • Gonda v. The Permanente Medical Group and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, November 2011 (pre-arbitration, resolved allegations of disability discrimination and failure to accommodate former medical group doctor)
  • Mannick v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., United States District Court, Northern District of California, August 2006 (obtained summary adjudication in high-profile, multi-million dollar Title III/24 ADA access action and favorably settled remaining claims on the eve of trial)
  • Rigo Lozoya v. PA Acquisition Corp, d/b/a Party America, Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, October 2006 (resolved class action alleging recovery of overtime wages under Labor Code section 1194, meal and rest period violations and unfair competition under Business & Professions Code section 17200)
  • Schiff v. City and County of San Francisco, United States District Court, Northern District of California, January 2006 (lead attorney defending former San Francisco Chief of Police sued in multi-plaintiff, complex reverse discrimination action; favorable resolution of action after filing summary judgment motion)
  • Sterman v.  Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan., Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco (obtained voluntary dismissal of sexual orientation discrimination based upon deposition of plaintiff)
  • Stringer v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, May 2008 (resolved class action alleging recovery of Labor Code 1194 overtime wages, meal and rest period violations and unfair competition under Business & Professions Code section 17200)
  • Tate  v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, August 2009 (on the eve of trial, resolved class action alleging recovery of overtime wages, meal and rest period violations and unfair competition under Business & Professions Code section 17200)

Representative Other Cases

  • Advanced Spine, United States District Court, Northern District of California, 1999 and 2000 (assisted in the representation of a leading manufacturer of a medical device involved in national collective tort litigation; defeated million plus dollar claim on summary judgment)
  • Ballas v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2004 (resolved Title 24 ADA access action)
  • Brown v. New York Life, United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2004 (obtained summary judgment in age/sex/national origin discrimination action and upheld decision after oral argument before the 9th Circuit)
  • Calhan v.  Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, Kaiser Foundation Health Plan., Superior Court of California, County of Alameda, 2011 (resolved sexual discrimination action after deposition of plaintiff)
  • Efron v. Clare Chapman Storey & Bowen LLP, Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco, 2004 (handled disability/medical condition discrimination and retaliation action)
  • Fernandes v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals and Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2006 (settled Title III/Title 24 ADA access action.
  • Finger v. Walgreen Co., Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Francisco, April 2005 (favorably defended Title III ADA access action)
  • Lincoln National Insurance Company vs. TakeCare Inc., United States District Court, Northern District of California, April 1998 (argued and won summary judgment for defendants in 7 million dollar action involving breach of a stock purchase agreement; successfully argued before the 9th Circuit to uphold the lower court’s ruling)
  • Lockett v. Embassy Suites, Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Mateo, 2005 (favorably settled contentious race discrimination and wrongful termination action after plaintiff’s deposition)
  • Mack v. Oakland Renaissance Associates, Park Lane Hotels International, Inc., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, 2007 (favorably resolved contentious sexual harassment and retaliation action)
  • Ram v. United Plastics., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, February 2005 (resolved sexual harassment and defamation action)
  • Sabido v. Walgreen Co., United States District Court, Northern District of California, March 2005 (shortly before trial, successfully mediated contentious disability discrimination claim)
  • Smith v. McDonald’s, Superior Court, State of Washington, October 2004 (obtained summary judgment in wrongful termination action)
  • Tidwell v. Walgreen Co., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, 2005 (obtained favorable settlement as lead counsel in multi-claim race based employment discrimination, wrongful termination, and CFRA retaliation action)
  • Vargas v. New York Life, United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2004 (obtained summary judgment in disability/age/sex/national origin discrimination action upheld by the 9th Circuit)
  • Ward v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, United States District Court, Northern District of California, (favorably resolved disability discrimination action brought by former doctor after removal of privileges and credentials)
  • Yamamoto v. KQED, 2006 (crafted pre-litigation resolution of threatened disability/CFRA/FMLA discrimination action)