Norman H. Pine 

Norman Pine of Pine Tillett LLP is an attorney whose success in plaintiff-side appellate practice has earned him widespread respect and influence. Over the past two decades, he has handled multiple cases that have shaped California Supreme Court law on employment issues.

One of his most satisfying recent wins involved the appellate victory that he (and partner Scott Tillett) achieved in a case involving a continuing pattern of sexual battery in the workplace.

The defendant’s abuse had driven Pine’s client into a dark place, experiencing feelings of despair and hopelessness. The depth of that depression was reflected by the jury’s $8 million emotional distress damages award. The despicability of the conduct was reflected by an additional $50 million punitive damages award.

“David, who owned a media company, exhibited the worst sexual harassment behavior I have seen,” Pine said. “Among other things, he once grabbed our client’s breasts, publicly exposing them; he often touched her inappropriately in front of other employees; twice he forced her to view scatological pornography in the presence of himself and others; and he routinely dropped his pants, grabbed her head, and shoved it into his crotch while simulating oral sex.”

Pine was talking about defendant Alkiviades David, a billionaire who was under the illusion that his wealth could buy him immunity. He was wrong. First, trial counsel (Allred, Maroko & Goldberg) secured the $58 million jury award, upheld by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michelle Williams. Second, Pine Tillett convinced the appellate court that the entire judgment should be affirmed. Khan v. David, B305849 (Cal. Ct. App. May. 27, 2022).

“We were driven to fight for her because she deserved nothing less than the full force of the law on her side,” Pine said. “Her courage and strength inspired our deepest respect because of her extraordinary bravery in taking on her rich and powerful abuser.”

David claimed denial of a fair trial because he could not represent himself, because the court excluded much of his evidence, and because of excessive punitive damages.

“The appellate court saw right through his claims,” Pine said. This man had the means necessary to ruin her financially, socially, and professionally. She had the will to not let it happen.”

—Douglas Saunders