Associate Attorney | (619) 866-3444 | firstname.lastname@example.org
Apart from a brief detour to UCLA as an undergraduate, Jake has lived nearly his entire life in San Diego. He currently calls North Park home and enjoys the boutique coffeehouses, unique restaurants, and craft breweries that neighborhood has to offer. He is an avid sports fan, as a supporter of the UCLA Bruins, the Padres, and Everton FC (the other team in Liverpool). He enjoys running, hiking, playing guitar and producing music, and playing indoor soccer on weeknights. His literal claim to fame is a Jeopardy! championship in 2012.
Jake joined Gupta Evans and Associates after spending two years with Dinsmore & Shohl. At his prior firm, he gained extensive experience in real estate and business litigation, including breach of warranty and products litigation. Prior to that, Jake practiced at a large national law firm in intellectual property and commercial litigation.
Jake has experience in real estate, commercial, intellectual property, trade secrets and trade dress, environmental, government contractor, and employment litigation. One of his big wins involved winning a summary judgment in a federal breach of warranty case in favor of a large automotive manufacturer. He has also achieved successful resolutions involving commercial lease disputes and breach of contract disputes. His intellectual interests also include the emerging body of law on privacy and cannabis.
Jake graduated from the University of California, Los Angeles in 2010 and graduated magna cum laude and Order of the Coif from the University of San Diego School of Law in 2014. In law school, Jake was a Lead Articles Editor for the San Diego Law Review and served as a judicial extern for Judge Janis Sammartino of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California.
In a previous article, I discussed the often blurry line between permissible pre-litigation communications and constitutionally unprotected extortionate demands. However, one important dimension of the civil extortion universe was left unaddressed there—that is, no claim for civil extortion can lie unless the victim actually pays the extorter. In much of the foundational precedent surrounding the […]
The Sphinx on Skunk: Justice Thomas Speaks Out(!) on the Inconsistent Enforcement of Federal Cannabis Prohibition
They say that war makes for strange bedfellows. As it turns out, the war on drugs is no exception. In a recent opinion from the United States Supreme Court, conservative stalwart Justice Clarence Thomas rebuked the federal government’s “half-in, half-out” stance on state-legal cannabis, and strongly implied that said approach was untenable from a federalist […]
In a previous article, I discussed the potential impacts of a then-forthcoming decision in the case of In re United Cannabis Corporation, which had the potential to widen access to federal bankruptcy relief to cannabis-adjacent hemp businesses. However, the In re United Cannabis case ended not with a bang, but with a whimper. On January […]