Attorney RecordSan Francisco County
Elizabeth Joan Cabraser · 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.
Elizabeth Joan Cabraser is on California’s State Bar roll, #83151, admitted in 1978; license status: active as of 22 July 2026. The address of record is in San Francisco, San Francisco County. 8 practice areas are listed in the registry, shown on this page. 48 case appearances are listed on this profile. Registry record updated 7 October 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 business law 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 7 October 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 | #83151 |
|---|---|
| License status | Active |
| Admitted | 1978 |
| Law school | Univ of California Berkeley |
| Firm | Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP |
| Location | San Francisco, San Francisco County |
| Registry identity | Official State Bar record |
Diamond members practicing Business Law 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Laffitte v. Robert Half International Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 1 Cal. 5th 480 | California Supreme Court | 11 August 2016 |
| Benjamin Joffe v. Google Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 729 F.3d 1262 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 10 September 2013 |
| Joffe v. Google, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 746 F.3d 920 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 10 September 2013 |
| Helen Targan v. Nissan North America, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 475 F. App'x 221 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 2 August 2012 |
| In re Toyota Motor Corp. Unintended Acceleration Marketing, Sales Practices, & Products Liability Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 838 F. Supp. 2d 967 | U.S. District Court, Central District of California | 12 March 2012 |
| Hepting v. AT & T Corp. | Counsel for the appellant | 671 F.3d 881 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 29 December 2011 |
| In Re Google Inc. Street View Electronic Communications Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 794 F. Supp. 2d 1067 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 29 June 2011 |
| Steering Committee v. Daniel E. Becnel, Jr. | Counsel for the respondent | 386 F. App'x 584 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 25 June 2010 |
| Henry v. Lehman Commercial Paper, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 471 F.3d 977 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 8 December 2006 |
| In Re Vitamin Cases | Counsel for the respondent | 110 Cal. App. 4th 1041 | California Court of Appeal | 20 August 2003 |
| Kent v. DaimlerChrysler Corp. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 200 F. Supp. 2d 1208 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 13 June 2002 |
| Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 273 F.3d 1266 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 14 December 2001 |
| Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10393 | California Supreme Court | 14 December 2001 |
| Nelson v. Capital One Bank | Counsel for the plaintiff | 206 F.R.D. 499 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 15 November 2001 |
| Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4955 | California Supreme Court | 15 June 2001 |
| Zinser v. Accufix Research Institute, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 253 F.3d 1180 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 15 June 2001 |
| Spielholz v. Superior Court of Los Angeles Cty. | Counsel for the petitioner | 86 Cal. App. 4th 1366 | California Court of Appeal | 8 February 2001 |
| Linney v. Cellular Alaska Partnership | Counsel for the respondent | 151 F.3d 1234 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 21 August 1998 |
| Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp. | Counsel for the respondent | 150 F.3d 1011 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 9 June 1998 |
| Valentino v. Carter-Wallace, Inc. | Counsel for the respondent | 97 F.3d 1227 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 7 October 1996 |
| In re California Micro Devices Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 168 F.R.D. 276 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 19 July 1996 |
| In re California Micro Devices Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 168 F.R.D. 257 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 2 February 1996 |
| In re Wells Fargo Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 157 F.R.D. 467 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 25 August 1994 |
| In re Wells Fargo Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 156 F.R.D. 223 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 30 June 1994 |
| In Re Oracle Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 852 F. Supp. 1437 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 14 June 1994 |
| Moore v. Keegan Management Co. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 154 F.R.D. 237 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 31 March 1994 |
| Wolford v. Gaekle | Counsel for the respondent | 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1942 | California Supreme Court | 21 March 1994 |
| Wolford v. Gaekle | Counsel for the respondent | 19 F.3d 470 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 21 March 1994 |
| Greenwald v. Wells Fargo & Co. | Counsel for the appellant | 12 F.3d 922 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 29 December 1993 |
| Greenwald v. Wells Fargo & Co. | Counsel for the appellant | 93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9735 | California Supreme Court | 29 December 1993 |
| In Re Oracle Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 829 F. Supp. 1176 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 9 August 1993 |
| Levine v. Diamanthuset, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 950 F.2d 1478 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 19 December 1991 |
| Levine v. Diamanthuset, Inc. | Counsel for the appellant | 91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9909 | California Supreme Court | 19 December 1991 |
| Christensen v. Superior Court | Counsel for the petitioner | 54 Cal. 3d 868 | California Supreme Court | 2 December 1991 |
| Gray v. First Winthrop Corp. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 776 F. Supp. 504 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 28 October 1991 |
| In re Oracle Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 136 F.R.D. 639 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 6 May 1991 |
| Church v. Consolidated Freightways, Inc. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 137 F.R.D. 294 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 12 April 1991 |
| In re Adobe Systems, Inc. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 139 F.R.D. 150 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 9 April 1991 |
| Gray v. First Winthrop Corp. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 754 F. Supp. 157 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 13 November 1990 |
| Moskowitz v. Vitalink Communications Corp. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 751 F. Supp. 155 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 30 October 1990 |
| Gray v. First Winthrop Corp. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 133 F.R.D. 39 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 25 October 1990 |
| In re Oracle Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 132 F.R.D. 538 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 18 October 1990 |
| In re Oracle Securities Litigation | Counsel for the plaintiff | 131 F.R.D. 688 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 3 August 1990 |
| Levine v. Diamanthuset, Inc. | Counsel for the plaintiff | 722 F. Supp. 579 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 29 March 1989 |
| Leonard v. Baumer | Counsel for the plaintiff | 122 F.R.D. 251 | U.S. District Court, Central District of California | 24 June 1988 |
| Kirkorian v. Borelli | Counsel for the plaintiff | 695 F. Supp. 446 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 6 May 1988 |
| Wright v. Schock | Counsel for the appellant | 742 F.2d 541 | U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | 11 September 1984 |
| Wright v. Schock | Counsel for the plaintiff | 571 F. Supp. 642 | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California | 30 June 1983 |
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.
Third-party recognitions
Third-party recognitions, as published by their issuers. CAR does not rank attorneys. How to read a Chambers recognition.
Chambers USA 2026, Band 1, Litigation: Mainly Plaintiffs (California). As published by Chambers and Partners; CAR does not rank attorneys. Firm at the time: Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP.
Published source · Methodology
Published by Chambers and Partners and shown under licence. Not yet confirmed by the attorney. Last checked 3 October 2026.
Chambers USA 2026, Band 1, Product Liability: Plaintiffs (USA - Nationwide). As published by Chambers and Partners; CAR does not rank attorneys. Firm at the time: Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP.
Published source · Methodology
Published by Chambers and Partners and shown under licence. Not yet confirmed by the attorney. Last checked 3 October 2026.
Are you this attorney? Claim this record to confirm, correct or remove a recognition →
Issuers set their own criteria and may sell marketing products to the firms they recognize. A recognition is not a guarantee of any result. The California Attorney Registry is not affiliated with Chambers and Partners.
On the official record
The employer on the official record is Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP.
The law school on the record is UC Berkeley School of Law.
Admitted to the California Bar in 1978 · 48 years on the roll.
8 practice areas are on the record, listed on this page.
48 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 Elizabeth Joan Cabraser’s license status, bar number #83151, 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
Business Law 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