Attorney RecordLitigation · San Francisco County
Claudia M. Vetesi · Litigation Attorney
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.
Claudia M. Vetesi is on California’s State Bar roll, #233485, admitted in 2004; license status: active as of 22 July 2026. The address of record is in San Francisco, San Francisco County. Practice areas listed in the registry: Litigation. 17 case appearances are listed on this profile. The employer on the official record is Morrison & Foester. Registry record updated 11 September 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 litigation 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 11 September 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 | #233485 |
|---|---|
| License status | Active |
| Admitted | 2004 |
| Law school | Univ of California Berkeley |
| Firm | Morrison & Foester |
| Location | San Francisco, San Francisco County |
| Registry identity | Official State Bar record |
Diamond members practicing Litigation in San Francisco County
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smythe v. Uber Techs., Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 24 Cal. App. 5th 327 | California Court of Appeal | 8 June 2018 |
| Cordas v. Uber Technologies, Inc. | Counsel for the defendant | 228 F. Supp. 3d 985 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 5 January 2017 |
| Congdon v. Uber Technologies, Inc. | Counsel for the defendant | 226 F. Supp. 3d 983 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 8 December 2016 |
| Chad Brazil v. Dole Packaged Foods, LLC | Counsel for the respondent | 660 F. App'x 531 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 30 September 2016 |
| Monster Beverage Corporation v. Dennis Herrera | Counsel for the appellant | 650 F. App'x 344 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 17 May 2016 |
| Alessandra Balser v. the Hain Celestial Group | Counsel for the respondent | 640 F. App'x 694 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 22 February 2016 |
| Hart v. Colvin | Counsel for the plaintiff | 310 F.R.D. 427 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 14 October 2015 |
| Kosta v. Del Monte Foods, Inc. | Counsel for the defendant | 308 F.R.D. 217 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 30 July 2015 |
| Anderson v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc. | Counsel for the defendant | 87 F. Supp. 3d 1226 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 8 April 2015 |
| In re Garcia on Admission | Counsel for the petitioner | 58 Cal. 4th 440 | California Supreme Court | 2 January 2014 |
| Pardini v. Unilever United States, Inc. | Counsel for the defendant | 961 F. Supp. 2d 1048 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 9 July 2013 |
| Brazil v. Dole Food Co. | Counsel for the defendant | 935 F. Supp. 2d 947 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 25 March 2013 |
| Howe v. Bank of America N.A. | Counsel for the respondent | 179 Cal. App. 4th 1443 | California Court of Appeal | 16 November 2009 |
| Ruiz v. Gap, Inc. | Counsel for the defendant | 622 F. Supp. 2d 908 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 6 April 2009 |
| Ruiz v. Gap, Inc. | Counsel for the defendant | 540 F. Supp. 2d 1121 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 24 March 2008 |
| Rigoberto Chaidez v. Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General | Counsel for the petitioner | 486 F.3d 1079 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 17 May 2007 |
| Chaidez v. Gonzales | Counsel for the petitioner | 476 F.3d 773 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 13 February 2007 |
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.
On the official record
The employer on the official record is Morrison & Foester.
A firm or employer website answers at mofo.com, the domain of the email address on the State Bar record.
The law school on the record is UC Berkeley School of Law.
Admitted to the California Bar in 2004 · 22 years on the roll.
Practice areas on the record: Litigation.
17 appearances as counsel in published opinions are on this record.
The address of record is in San Francisco, in San Francisco County, where matters are ordinarily heard at the Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco, seated at San Francisco.
Confirm Claudia M. Vetesi’s license status, bar number #233485, 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
Litigation in San Francisco County: next on the roll
San Francisco 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