Chris Chorba is Co-Partner in Charge of the Los Angeles office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher and Co-Chair of the firm’s Class Actions Practice Group. He specializes in defending class actions and complex litigation, and he has been recognized both nationally and in California in Chambers USA: America’s Leading Lawyers for Business.
Mr. Chorba has had substantial experience litigating a broad range of complex commercial matters at the trial and appellate level in California and throughout the country, with an emphasis on claims involving California’s Unfair Competition and False Advertising Laws (Business & Professions Code § 17200 and § 17500), the Consumers Legal Remedies Act (California Civil Code § 1750 et seq.), the Lanham Act, and the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005. His litigation and counseling experience includes work for companies in the automotive, consumer products, entertainment, financial services, food and beverage, social media, technology, telecommunications, insurance, health care, retail, and utility industries.
- Secured the dismissal of more than one dozen class, representative, and complex actions on the pleadings, and successfully defended these dismissals on appeal (see, e.g., Cahen v. Toyota Motor Corp., 147 F. Supp. 3d 955 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2015), aff’d, 2017 WL 6525501 (9th Cir. 2017); Riva v. PepsiCo, Inc, No. 13-647, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113558 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2013); Parker v. iolo technologies, LLC, No. 12-00984, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138803 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 20, 2012); Hairston v. South Beach Bev. Co., No. 11-419, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74279 (C.D. Cal. May 18, 2012); Wright v. General Mills, No. 08-1532, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90576 (S.D. Cal. Sept. 30, 2009); ZAP v. DaimlerChrysler AG et al., No. B193331, 2008 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1392 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 21, 2008), review denied (Cal. May 14, 2008); McKinniss v. General Mills, No. 07-2521, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96107 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 18, 2007); Pocino v. Jostens, Inc., No. B181449, 2006 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 3852 (Cal. Ct. App. May 3, 2006)).
- Assisted in the defense of a complex fraud and civil conspiracy action brought by the California Insurance Commissioner, which resulted a favorable defense verdict on five of six liability claims and all claims for monetary damages following a lengthy federal jury trial spanning several months in 2005, and a post-verdict order rejecting any punitive damages. Secured favorable jury verdict in limited retrial in 2012, resulting in no award of compensatory damages. The Daily Journal recognized this victory as one of its top defense verdicts of the year.
- Retained by product manufacturer to handle federal Lanham Act trial following an adverse, eight-figure jury verdict after initial trial in 2012. Secured exclusion of all damages evidence on the eve of the retrial, which resulted in a complete win for our client on all of plaintiff’s claims.
- Currently representing leading technology company in data privacy class action alleging violations of Wiretap Act, California Invasion of Privacy Act, and other statutes.
- Secured the reversals on appeal of judgments totaling $295 million in three certified class actions in New Mexico and California involving installment payment plans for auto insurance policies (Nellis v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Ariz., No. 29,295, 2011 N.M. App. LEXIS 114 (N.M. Ct. App. Sept. 20, 2011); Nellis v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 2011 N.M. App. Unpub. LEXIS 344 (N.M. Ct. App. Sept. 20, 2011); Troyk v. Farmers Group, Inc., 171 Cal. App. 4th 1305 (2009)).
- Represented a utility company in having a city ordinance declared unconstitutional in violation of the Contract Clause by a Federal District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, and obtained and defended a substantial award of attorneys’ fees for the client (So. Cal. Gas Co. v. City of Santa Ana, 202 F. Supp. 2d 1129 (C.D. Cal.), aff’d, 336 F.3d 885 (9th Cir. 2002)). Represented same client in similar dispute against another municipality, and secured favorable summary judgment ruling and award of attorneys’ fees (So. Cal. Gas Co. v. City of Alhambra, No. 10-8635, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107514 (C.D. Cal. June 6, 2011)).
- The Changed Landscape of Businesses’ Right to Enforce Arbitration Agreements: A Survey of Class Actions Involving Petitions to Compel Arbitration After Concepcion, Bloomberg/BNA Class Action Litigation Report, November 22, 2013
- Chapters on Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200 and 17500, et seq. and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, in California Civil Procedure Before Trial: Claims and Defenses (The Rutter Group)
- “Expert Analysis of Class Certification Issues,” in Litigation Services Handbook: The Role of the Financial Expert (5th ed. 2012)
- American Bar Association, A Practitioner’s Guide to Class Actions, “Other Due Process Challenges to Class Device” (2010)
- “Resolving The Dispute Over Injunctive Relief Class Actions,” Bridgeport Consumer Class Action Litigation Conference, January 8, 2016
- “State of the Law on Consumer Class Actions,” 2015 National Consumer Class Action Litigation & Management Conference (Bridgeport), January 9, 2015
- “Other Pivotal Residential Mortgage Class Action Issues Currently in Play and Coming Down the Pike from the U.S. Supreme Court: Class Certifications, CAFA, Removal and More,” 12th National Forum on Residential Mortgage Litigation & Regulatory Enforcement (ACI), January 16, 2014
- “Overview of U.S. Class Actions, Defending and Managing Litigation Against Financial Institutions” (C5 Global Conferences), November 28-29, 2012
After graduating cum laude from the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, Mr. Chorba received his J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law, where he served on the Editorial Board of the Virginia Law Review. He is admitted to practice before all state and federal courts in California, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court of the United States.