Eva regularly serves as the lead in-court lawyer in complex coordinated proceedings, managing large numbers of single and multi-plaintiff cases with multiple co-defendants, and handling complicated science presentations, bellwether-case selection arguments, large-scale document production format disputes and jurisdictional challenges with the court. Her communication skills and forthright demeanor have gained her credibility with judges, clients and opposing counsel, which makes her effective at advocating for her clients in everything from delicate individual contract negotiations to high-volume litigation and aggressive discovery demands.
Eva has worked closely with clients, counsel and witnesses in federal and state court litigation and pre-litigation matters involving pharmaceuticals, medical devices, supplements, household goods, vehicles, security products and environmental claims. She has assisted companies in responding to governmental investigation matters and advises clients regarding external and internal communications strategy associated with litigation. Eva has also been responsible for and worked on a wide variety of other matters, such as business disputes, breaches of contract, interference with business relationships, misappropriation of confidential information, insurance coverage disputes and employment matters.
In litigating these matters, Eva has counseled on strategy development; conducted direct and cross-examination of witnesses at trial; managed trial and litigation teams; deposed and defended expert, company and fact witnesses; drafted and argued dispositive and jurisdictional motions; handled eDiscovery and document production issues; assisted in drafting and preparing appellate briefs; and negotiated favorable settlements on behalf of the firm’s clients.
Eva is the Orange County office’s managing partner and is committed to serving her firm and local community. She has served as the Orange County office’s representative to Shook’s pro bono committee and the Associates’ Committee, volunteers at a local pro se clinic and her church, and is a member of the firm’s Benefits Committee. Eva previously interned for the International Justice Mission, taught in the Minnesota Justice Foundation’s Street Law program, prosecuted domestic violence matters through the University of Minnesota’s Domestic Assault Prosecution Clinic, and volunteered with orphans at Vale de Bencão Mission in Sao Paulo, Brazil, where she became proficient in conversational written and spoken Portuguese. She also served as a volunteer deputy district attorney for the Orange County District Attorney's office in 2008, where she engaged in all the responsibilities of a sworn deputy district attorney, including prosecuting a domestic violence misdemeanor jury trial and a court trial, negotiating plea agreements, arguing and examining witnesses in evidentiary, plea withdrawal and bail motions, arguing and examining witnesses in felony preliminary hearings and handling case initiation.
Hubei Gezhouba Sanlian Industrial Co. vs. Robinson Helicopter Co., 2009 WL 2190197 (C.D. Cal.). Eva represented the plaintiffs in the trial of a case that resulted from a helicopter accident in China in 1994 in which three people died and multiple damages occurred. The helicopter was manufactured by a California company, and plaintiffs had attempted to find relief in multiple legal forums. Eva and her partner successfully enforced a Chinese judgment in California, likely the first of its kind, and obtained a $6.4 million verdict, which was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Daily Journal named it one of the top plaintiff verdicts in California in 2009.
Cardenas v. Boston Scientific Corp., No. 12-2912 (Mass. Super. Ct., Middlesex Cty., 2014). Plaintiff claimed she was injured following implantation of a Boston Scientific Obtryx® sling in her body for the treatment of stress urinary incontinence. Before and during the trial, Shook attorneys won challenges regarding plaintiff’s evidence, and used testimony from treating physicians, taken by Eva, along with expert opinions to show the mesh product was safe and effective. Following a two-week trial, the jury's verdict found no design or warning defect for Boston Scientific Corp.
Sanchez v. Boston Scientific, No. 12-5762 (C.D. Cal.) In the first transvaginal mesh case tried in California against Boston Scientific, plaintiff alleged she was injured when she was implanted with a Boston Scientific Pinnacle Pelvic Floor Repair Kit. Eva and her partner presented a strong case for the statute of limitations and that the plaintiff indeed had knowledge of the product risks, such that after a six-day jury trial and the close of evidence, the parties came to a settlement.
Moderator and Panelist, "ESI & Discovery Disputes in California," Electronic Discovery Institute, 2017 Spring Meeting, Qualcomm, San Diego, California, April 28, 2017.
Lecturer, "Write Smart: Documents You Create Can Be Used Against Your Company," various corporate in-house training sessions, 2016.
Lecturer, "Knowing Your Limits: Competence and Substance Abuse," ACC Southern California CLE and Networking Event, Newport Beach, California, July 30, 2015.
Lecturer, "Write Smart: Documents You Create Can Be Used Against Your Company," Northern California American Quality Society Biomedical Discussion Group, Newark, California, January 23, 2013.
Lecturer, "Write Smart: Documents You Create Can Be Used Against Your Company," American Quality Society Annual Meeting, Anaheim, California, May 22, 2012.
Presenter, "Ethics in Discovery: What You Can Do vs. What You Should Do," Corporate In-House CLE, New York City, New York, November 21, 2011.