Attorneys

Print Pdf
 
Elizabeth G. Chilton
ELIZABETH G. CHILTON “For me, appellate work is the most intellectually challenging and rewarding kind of law, and I'm just as passionate about it now as when I started practicing 30 years ago.”

Elizabeth G. Chilton

Of Counsel

Los Angeles (main)

t: 310.282.6205
f: 310.556.2920
echilton@glaserweil.com

Elizabeth G. Chilton

Of Counsel

Los Angeles (main)

Elizabeth G. Chilton, who is of counsel at Glaser Weil, practices exclusively in appellate litigation. During nearly three decades of appellate practice, Ms. Chilton has handled scores of appeals and writ proceedings in both state and federal courts, including the California Supreme Court and the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Her arguments and briefs span a wide range of legal issues, including intellectual property disputes, insurance coverage matters, legal malpractice cases and employment litigation — covering claims of sexual harassment, discrimination and wrongful termination. Ms. Chilton has also handled matters pertaining to bankruptcy, probate and divorce and entertainment, administrative, real estate, environmental and commercial law.

Ms. Chilton handles precedent-setting cases, including one that addressed California’s overtime laws that was decided by the 2nd District Court of Appeal in favor of Ms. Chilton’s client, Dolores Press. The ruling got the attention of state lawmakers, who later passed legislation to prevent similar decisions.

More More

Ms. Chilton received her law degree from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, where she was awarded Order of the Coif upon graduation. She also earned her bachelor’s degree in history at UCLA.

Ms. Chilton competes on the professional dog agility circuit with her Pembroke Welsh Corgi, Trevor, a six-time champion and one of the top winning corgis in the country.

Small
 
 
  • Practice Areas
  • Education
    • University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, J.D., Order of the Coif

    • University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., history, summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa

  • State Bar Admissions
    • California

  • Representative Matters
    • Arechiga v. Dolores Press, Inc., 192 Cal.App.4th 567 (2011): In a case of first impression, the 2nd District Court of Appeal held in a unanimous, published opinion that the enactment in 2000 of Labor Code §515(d), providing that overtime shall be paid at an hourly rate equal to 1/40th of the employee's weekly salary, did not repeal California's "explicit mutual wage agreement" doctrine. Under that doctrine, an employer and employee may lawfully agree to a guaranteed fixed salary that covers both regular and overtime pay, so long as the employer pays all overtime hours at 1.5 times the employee's basic rate. Accordingly, the Court held, the plaintiff employee, who had been dismissed by Glaser Weil's client for unexcused absences and poor work performance, was not entitled to any additional overtime and his wage and hour claim for hundreds of thousands of additional compensation had properly been decided in favor of the defendant employer.

    • Baer v. Douglas (unpublished opinion, 2012): In a case of first impression, the 4th District Court of Appeal (Division One) unanimously held that when purchase money trust deeds are recorded simultaneously, priority is determined by the grantor's intent and not by either the instrument number assigned by the county recorder's office or the time of the trust deeds' indexing. The Court upheld the decision by the trial court, finding that the parties had intended to give first priority position to the insured of Glaser Weil's client, despite the fact that his trust deed had erroneously been given a higher instrument number than that of the competing trust deed. Glaser Weil's client was given clear title to the multi-million dollar property, enabling him to sell the property to mitigate his damages.

    • Piper v. MKA Real Estate Opportunity Fund (unpublished opinion, 2011): Judgment in favor of the insured of Glaser Weil's client, a lender, was also affirmed in this case. Glaser Weil had obtained dismissal of all claims, including fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and RICO, brought against the lender, alleging that it had knowingly conspired with the plaintiffs' business associates to obtain and record forged multi-million dollar liens against the plaintiffs' property. The 4th District Court of Appeal (Division Three) unanimously agreed that none of the plaintiffs' allegations stated any claim against the lender, and affirmed its dismissal from the case.

  • News
  • Publications
    • “Progress Marches On: Trying Complex Civil Cases, Then and Now,” by Patricia L. Glaser and Elizabeth G. Chilton for Gavel to Gavel, the Los Angeles Superior Court Judicial Magazine, Fall 2010

  • Practice Areas
  • Education
    • University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, J.D., Order of the Coif

    • University of California, Los Angeles, B.A., history, summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa

  • State Bar Admissions
    • California

  • Representative Matters
    • Arechiga v. Dolores Press, Inc., 192 Cal.App.4th 567 (2011): In a case of first impression, the 2nd District Court of Appeal held in a unanimous, published opinion that the enactment in 2000 of Labor Code §515(d), providing that overtime shall be paid at an hourly rate equal to 1/40th of the employee's weekly salary, did not repeal California's "explicit mutual wage agreement" doctrine. Under that doctrine, an employer and employee may lawfully agree to a guaranteed fixed salary that covers both regular and overtime pay, so long as the employer pays all overtime hours at 1.5 times the employee's basic rate. Accordingly, the Court held, the plaintiff employee, who had been dismissed by Glaser Weil's client for unexcused absences and poor work performance, was not entitled to any additional overtime and his wage and hour claim for hundreds of thousands of additional compensation had properly been decided in favor of the defendant employer.

    • Baer v. Douglas (unpublished opinion, 2012): In a case of first impression, the 4th District Court of Appeal (Division One) unanimously held that when purchase money trust deeds are recorded simultaneously, priority is determined by the grantor's intent and not by either the instrument number assigned by the county recorder's office or the time of the trust deeds' indexing. The Court upheld the decision by the trial court, finding that the parties had intended to give first priority position to the insured of Glaser Weil's client, despite the fact that his trust deed had erroneously been given a higher instrument number than that of the competing trust deed. Glaser Weil's client was given clear title to the multi-million dollar property, enabling him to sell the property to mitigate his damages.

    • Piper v. MKA Real Estate Opportunity Fund (unpublished opinion, 2011): Judgment in favor of the insured of Glaser Weil's client, a lender, was also affirmed in this case. Glaser Weil had obtained dismissal of all claims, including fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and RICO, brought against the lender, alleging that it had knowingly conspired with the plaintiffs' business associates to obtain and record forged multi-million dollar liens against the plaintiffs' property. The 4th District Court of Appeal (Division Three) unanimously agreed that none of the plaintiffs' allegations stated any claim against the lender, and affirmed its dismissal from the case.

  • News
  • Publications
    • “Progress Marches On: Trying Complex Civil Cases, Then and Now,” by Patricia L. Glaser and Elizabeth G. Chilton for Gavel to Gavel, the Los Angeles Superior Court Judicial Magazine, Fall 2010