×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLPOf Counsel
Nicholas M. Gedo
Pro

Nicholas M. Gedo

Not yet reviewed

505 North Brand Boulevard, Suite 1100, Glendale, CA 91203-3804

Appellate, Environmental, Complex Tort and Casualty and 2 more

About Nicholas M. Gedo

Having focused his practice on appellate and complex motion matters for the last 20 years, Nick offers clients a range and depth of appellate experience available almost nowhere outside of boutique appellate firms. Nick has now handled over 30 appellate matters and well over 50 summary judgment motions in both California and Ninth Circuit courts, obtaining successful results in the vast majority of his cases (see sample list of appellate matters he's handled below). He developed his obsession with clear, concise writing as an English major at Occidental College in Los Angeles and obtained his J.D. from UC Law San Francisco (formerly Hastings College of the Law). He became Of Counsel with WSHB just after the firm's inception in 1997.

In the News

•Appellate Court Directs Entry of Summary Judgment for WSHB in Multi-Million Dollar Dog Bite Lawsuit
•Defense Secures Summary Judgment in Workplace Injury Litigation
•Appellate Victory for Child Psychologist Sued Over Custody Recommendations
•WSHB Wins Summary Judgment for General Contractor in Case of High Importance to Construction Community

 

Nicholas M. Gedo (Glendale, California) View website

Reviews for Nicholas

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Insurance
  • Other 4
    • Appellate
    • Environmental
    • Complex Tort and Casualty
    • Product Liability

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Of Counsel
    Firm Name
    Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLP
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Experience: Hovsepyan v. The Anschutz Entertainment Group, Inc. et.al. 2021 WL 732840
    Zazueta v. Imperial Heights Healthcare & Wellness Center, LLC 2020 WL 6266767
    Nikkel v. Seasons Hospice & Palliative Care of CA 2020 WL 728311
    Solis v. Sky UK Limited 2020 WL 744202
    Shorter v. Ralphs Grocery Company 2019 WL 4879016
    Van Dyk Lines, Inc. v. Peterbilt Motors Company 2017 WL 1164508
    Mascori v. DR Horton 2016 WL
    Ghaffanpour v. Commerce Plaza Hotel (Summary judgment affirmed except as to one very minor claim) 2016 WL 1057050
    City of San Bernardino Municipal Water Dist. v. American Alternative Insurance Corp. 2015 WL 7574350
    Marzan v. Las Virgones Municipal Water District 2015 WL 7180730
    Valley Crest L
    scape Development, Inc. v. Mission Pools of Escondido, Inc. 238 Cal. App.4th 468
    Green v. SA Recycling 2014 WL 1653981
    Siraj v. Jerry's Famous Deli 2014 WL 184778
    Bryant v. Warr Communities, Inc. 2014 WL 635510
    Dragoo v. Nil
    FDIC 2011 WL
    Tran v. City of San Diego 2011 WL
    Rodeo Lane, LLC v. Taromi 2011 WL 245521
    Pinnacle Market Tower Assn, v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2010) 187 Cal. App. 4th 24
    Anvar v. Element L.A. LLC. 2010 WL 796927
    Avedikan v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. 2009 WL 1743609
    Silvia v. Mateo 2008 WL 2058711
    Alikhani v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc. 2008 WL 241094
    Hoier v. Global Digital Media Xchange, Inc. 2006 WL 3423359
    Maciel v. SIMAC Const. Inc. 2006 WL 2674202
    Michael v. Denbeste Transportation Inc. (2006) 137 Cal. App. 4th 1082
    Rodriguez v. American Technologies, Inc. (2006) 136 Cal. App. 4th 111
    Holguin v. Flores (2004) 122 Cal. App. 4th 428
    In re Estate of Holloway 2003 WL 1309820
    Luvisi v. Safeway Inc. 2002 WL 434954
    Shin v. Space-Time Enterprises (Summary judgment in sexual assault claim affirmed except for one very minor wage/hour claim) 2000 WL
    Defense Secures Summary Judgment in Workplace Injury Litigation
    12.10.25
    Appellate Court Directs Entry of Summary Judgment for WSHB in Multi-Million Dollar Dog Bite Lawsuit
    12.10.25
    Appellate Victory for Child Psychologist Sued Over Custody Recommendations
    6.13.25
    WSHB Wins Summary Judgment for General Contractor in Case of High Importance to Construction Community
    4.21.23
    WSHB Successfully Defends HOA on Appeal After One Resident is Attacked by Another on Premises
    3.6.23
    Powerhouse WSHB Team Successfully Argues Right of Intervention Before Ninth Circuit
    12.20.22
    Arizona Supreme Court Allows Court of Appeals Decision Exp
    ing Defendants' Ability to Enforce Settlements to St

    7.17.19
  • Additional Links
    http://www.wshblaw.com

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    California
  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    University of California Hastings Law School
    Class of 1987
    J.D.
    Other Education
    Occidental College
    Class of 1982
    B.A.

Email Nicholas M. Gedo

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message:
Return to Profile Reset Form

Attorneys FAQs

  • How many attorneys are in this law firm?
    Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLP has 500 attorneys at this location.
  • What law school did this attorney attend?
    Nicholas M. Gedo attended University of California Hastings Law School.
  • What year was this attorney's law firm established?
    Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLP was established in 1997.

Attorney information displayed in this FAQ section is based upon information the lawyer has included on their profile, in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals.

These FAQs include information about a lawyer's background, but do not evaluate their knowledge of the law, past performance on individual cases, personality, or communication skills.

It is solely the responsibility of lawyers and law firms to ensure that any information they provide complies with all applicable laws and rules of professional conduct.

You should be aware that the information we rely upon may not be comprehensive, or frequently updated.

Always research the lawyer further to get a better understanding of their license credentials, disciplinary status, background, and experience.

Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions