Attorney RecordLos Angeles County
Blithe Smith Bock · California Lawyer
Can’t reach them, or not sure who to call? Submit your case for review · attorneys who practice in your area read it and may send you terms. Free; your details stay masked until you choose.
Blithe Smith Bock is on California’s State Bar roll, #163567, admitted in 1992; license status: active as of 22 July 2026. The address of record is in Los Angeles, Los Angeles County. Practice areas listed in the registry: Appellate Law, Civil Rights and Employment. Certified by the State Bar as a legal specialist in Appellate Law. Registry record updated 20 August 2026; license information comes from the State Bar.
This profile has not yet been claimed. Verify current license status at the State Bar before retaining counsel; the choice is always yours.
Have a civil rights matter? Submit your case for review.
Open a free case file, choose how attorneys may contact you, and review any terms they send. You decide whom to contact and whether to proceed.
In the last 30 days attorneys have read 11 filed matters on the registry.
Submit your case for reviewLegal information, not legal advice
Registry verification
Verified against official State Bar of California records · record last updated 20 August 2026. Contact information on this page comes from the public record and is shown free, the registry never paywalls it.
10+ published court opinions may name you. Claim your profile to review and add the ones that are yours →
The record
| State Bar number | #163567 |
|---|---|
| License status | Active |
| Admitted | 1992 |
| Law school | Univ of California at Los Angeles |
| Firm | Burke, Williams and Sorensen |
| Location | Los Angeles, Los Angeles County |
| Registry identity | Official State Bar record |
Practice areas
Practice areas are self-reported to the State Bar or added by the attorney; listing one is not a State Bar certification.
Understand your options
Free California worksheets to organize the facts before speaking with an attorney.
Verified profiles & presence
Professional identity links come from public sources or this attorney. Review-site ratings belong to their named source and may cover a firm or office. CAR does not combine them into an attorney rating.
Cases of record
From published opinions naming this attorney as counsel. The attorney has not yet confirmed these records.
| Case | Appeared for | Citation | Court | Decided |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Brian Mulligan v. James Nichols | Counsel for the respondent | 835 F.3d 983 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 29 August 2016 |
| Ahmad Arian v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 622 F. App'x 692 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 16 November 2015 |
| Cheyenne Desertrain v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 754 F.3d 1147 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 19 June 2014 |
| Rukhsana Chaudhry v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the appellant | 573 F. App'x 628 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 19 May 2014 |
| Rukhsana Chaudhry v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 751 F.3d 1096 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 19 May 2014 |
| Lisa Yuan v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 559 F. App'x 643 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 3 March 2014 |
| Ronald Boone v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 522 F. App'x 402 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 12 June 2013 |
| Claudio Radocchia v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 479 F. App'x 44 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 17 April 2012 |
| Dale Evans v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the appellant | 446 F. App'x 4 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 26 July 2011 |
| E. Sanchez v. William Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 442 F. App'x 256 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 7 July 2011 |
| Alvarado v. Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 437 F. App'x 584 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 9 June 2011 |
| Allen Fox v. Garvin | Counsel for the respondent | 417 F. App'x 704 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 3 March 2011 |
| David J. Lashgari v. William J. Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 408 F. App'x 56 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 7 January 2011 |
| Linda Tucker v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 399 F. App'x 202 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 6 October 2010 |
| Wayne Schulte v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 361 F. App'x 748 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 5 January 2010 |
| Mays v. City of Los Angeles Police Department | Counsel for the respondent | 358 F. App'x 944 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 December 2009 |
| Sanchez v. Canales | Counsel for the appellant | 574 F.3d 1169 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 30 July 2009 |
| J.M. ex rel. Pineda v. Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 333 F. App'x 188 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 5 June 2009 |
| J.M. ex rel. Magana v. Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 334 F. App'x 84 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 5 June 2009 |
| J.M. ex rel. Pineda v. Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 333 F. App'x 188 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 5 June 2009 |
| J.M. ex rel. Magana v. Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 334 F. App'x 84 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 5 June 2009 |
| Mitchell v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 299 F. App'x 719 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 6 November 2008 |
| Sibrian v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 288 F. App'x 385 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 1 August 2008 |
| Ejigu v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 286 F. App'x 977 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 21 July 2008 |
| Johnson v. Los Angeles Police Department | Counsel for the respondent | 255 F. App'x 191 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 20 November 2007 |
| Firouzabadi v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 235 F. App'x 471 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 23 July 2007 |
| Smith v. Ortiz | Counsel for the respondent | 234 F. App'x 698 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 20 June 2007 |
| Hart v. Parks | Counsel for the respondent | 450 F.3d 1059 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 19 June 2006 |
| Lashgari v. Bratton | Counsel for the respondent | 158 F. App'x 798 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 12 December 2005 |
| Fulgencio v. City of Los Angeles | Counsel for the respondent | 131 F. App'x 96 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 26 April 2005 |
Appearances in published opinions, drawn from public court records. Cases of record are matters of public record and are not a representation of results; past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Legal information, not legal advice.
Each case name opens the published opinion it comes from. Is a case not this attorney’s? The attorney can claim this profile and mark it as not theirs, which removes it from this page; anyone can report an error through Help & Support.
Certified specialties
Appellate Law
Certified by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.
On the official record
The State Bar of California has certified this attorney as a legal specialist in Appellate Law · a certification held by roughly one California attorney in sixty, and separate from any rating.
The employer on the official record is Burke, Williams and Sorensen.
A firm or employer website answers at bwslaw.com, the domain of the email address on the State Bar record.
The law school on the record is UCLA School of Law.
Admitted to the California Bar in 1992 · 34 years on the roll.
Practice areas on the record: Appellate Law, Civil Rights and Employment.
30 appearances as counsel in published opinions are on this record.
The address of record is in Los Angeles, in Los Angeles County, where matters are ordinarily heard at the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, seated at Los Angeles.
Confirm Blithe Smith Bock’s license status, bar number #163567, and official disciplinary or administrative history directly with the State Bar of California at apps.calbar.ca.gov before retaining counsel. This profile does not reproduce the complete official history; missing information does not mean no discipline. This page indexes public-record data and identifies verified claims; it does not rate attorney quality or predict results.
Legal information, not legal advice.
On the record nearby
Civil Rights in Los Angeles County: next on the roll
Los Angeles County: next on the roll
Listed alphabetically by last name, continuing from this record. Not a recommendation.
For Attorneys
Your profile is already on the roll. Make it yours.
Every California attorney is indexed here from the official State Bar roll, including you. Verify your identity in minutes, present your practice the way you want clients to see it, and unlock the Referral Exchange · send and receive matters with verified attorneys, fees divided 100% between counsel under CRPC 1.5.1.
Claim My ProfileFree to claim · referrals free at every level · identity verified against the State Bar record
Read the record. Then decide.
Describe your matter once, review the verified records, and place the call; the choice is always yours.
Find Your Counsel279,000+ attorney records · 58 counties · Official State Bar records