Profile cover photo
Profile photo
Lafayette Lawyers Daniel Horowitz
(925) 283-1863
(925) 283-1863


Post has attachment
A nice victory in the Coby Phillips case. Judge Burch found in our favor, ruling that a prior conviction was NOT a strike. We have now beaten a attempted murder, second attempted murder, drug conspiracy, third attempted murder and have a single murder conviction about to go on appeal. If we win that appeal, he goes free. Here's a link to the court's order.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Tons of coverage. Raises a lot of questions. Have we gone from a vigorous debate to something more? We are investigating.
Add a comment...


Forget for a minute whether you favor or don’t favor a travel ban. Think like a lawyer. Imagine that the 1st ban was truly defective and unconstitutional. Imagine that the new ban was written by really, really smart lawyers and that it is completely legal. COMPLETELY.

Now, imagine that 100 lawsuits are filed to stop it. Half the people in the nation like the ban. Half the people hate it. Half the judges like the ban. Half the judges hate it. 99 judges review the lawsuit to stop the ban and 99 reject the lawsuit. They put aside their personal feelings and just rule on the law.

Now, imagine that one judge, knows it is legal but believes to the bottom of his/her soul that this ban will ruin America. Let’s assume that the judge is a military hero, a true patriot and wants America to be strong. And swayed by these emotions, the judge issues an order TEMPORARILY banning the ban.

The judge sets EVIDENTIARY hearings really quickly and he/she knows that to make the order PERMANENT, certain factual findings have to be made. But there will be no jury, just this same judge, weighing the evidence.

So the constitutional question is this. Can this single, lone wolf judge, hold up the ban for weeks until the evidentiary hearing is held ? Can the judge take evidence and make findings and ban the ban for weeks or months until that order is appealed?

If no, why not? The current ban was held up by a judge. Does the fact that we posit that the new ban is well written and that 99 judges refused to bar it - does that fact, make the single judge’s order in the “new case” any less valid than the current order? Why? What is LEGALLY different?

If yes, then will this Presidency and all others in the future, be hampered by constant judicial second guessing of all executive decisions ?

If we don’t let the single lone wolf judge act aren’t we destroying the checks and balances that our constitution provides for?

These are historic and monumental questions. As a lawyer and as a student of American History, these are fascinating and exciting times.
Add a comment...


On January 28, 2017, United States District Court Judge, Ann Donnelly issued a limited order finding potentially unconstitutional, a part of President Trump’s executive order restricting immigration or travel from certain listed countries.

Regardless of whether you are for or against the President’s order, there is substantial legal merit to the Court’s decision. It is a fact that a non-U.S. citizen cannot access our courts and cannot assert their “rights” under “our” constitution. They have no rights. And the same works for us. For example, my client, radio show host and radio Hall of Fame inductee, Michael Savage, was summarily banned from Britain and to this day, he cannot travel there. He has no rights under British law to protest that exclusion and he has no rights to contest the foolish factual underpinnings of that ban.

The same is true for the people temporarily (or long term) barred from entry to the U.S.. Why then is the Judge’s decision likely correct? It is most likely correct because ONCE the United States accepts you into our system of laws, you do have rights. And people with valid Visas, valid immigration status etc., cannot lose those privileges which have been extended to them with the stroke of a Presidential pen.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) political director, Faiz Shakir made the statement,
“I hope Trump enjoys losing. He’s going to lose so much we’re going to get sick and tired of his losing”. That statement is not going to be true. Trump may not even challenge the recent decision as it is limited to a very narrow group of people. The big picture is still in effect and the headlines touting a defeat for the overall policy are simply incorrect.

It is important to remember that under President Obama, significant exercises of executive privilege were upheld by the courts. The entire area of executive privilege and the delegated ability of agencies from the FDA to the EPA are rarely taught in schools and rarely discussed in public. These powers are generally quite unfettered and lacking in due process guarantees. Oh sure, agencies are supposed to act in a fair and balanced manner but they often don’t. They are large, they have massive grey areas of law and fact to interpret and they possess tremendous and there are limited paths for judicial review.

As we see more executive orders from President Trump and the steering of federal agencies in a different direction - we will begin to understand that the power of the President exists in these executive orders. Congress can overturn the orders and courts can invalidate them (to a limited extent) but absent a powerful and organized opposition - the President, any President, can turn the nation 180 degrees with the quick stroke of a pen.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
Good article on our client, Coby Phillips.  Complex case - complex person.  Going to trial in Contra Costa County in September.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
We have filed a notice of appearance in the case against Chiropractor Steven Moon.  Moon was arrested for sexual conduct involving a patient.  We represent the patient under Marsy's law.  He is contending that the touch was either accidental or therapeutic.  !!!!!   He also sells NERIUM for wrinkles.  I checked out NERIUM and contrary to claims that it is clinically proven, it appears to be unproven and a potential poison.  Here's the medical blog on it - good reading.
Add a comment...

Post has attachment
My friend, Nancy Grace, is leaving HLN after more than a decade of brilliant television work.  What many people don't know is that initially, Nancy wanted to be on CNN and not the new format, sort of start up, that was HLN.  However, she was told that her show would make the new network and she agreed.  Her ratings were stunning and HLN is an established, successful channel because Nancy Grace put it on the map.  I was on 4 of her first 5 shows.  I very fondly remember the freezing days in the makeshift parking lot location "studio" where we sat for hours in uncomfortable chairs opining on the Peterson trial.  Nancy was training me.  She would waive her hands below camera level to tell me to wrap up or "you're doing great".  We would do her radio show in the mornings and then rush at break neck speed to the courtroom or studio.  Her show came on right after some guy who sounded like a foul mouthed teenager.  His name was Glenn Beck but he was a very different Glenn Beck than the guy we know today. 

Anyway, I will miss Nancy's show which I've done less of in recent years as the time in the studio is time away from my family.  Nancy has been blessed with a wonderful family as well.  I know she will have more time with them and they are all very fortunate for that. 

I will never forget how Nancy rushed to my side in my times of deep trouble and I am so proud of her, of who she is and I am so pleased that she is leaving on the very top with so much to her life and so much to do with her life and time.
Add a comment...

Started a Google ad Words campaign for Oksana Tsykova, the lawyer in our office who does personal injury work and criminal law.  Did a basic website -
Add a comment...


On my return from vacation i realized that I lost my parking ticket for the San Francisco Airport parking lot. No problem, right?  They track you by license plate and they can calculate what is owed plus some reasonable penalty for making them do the work.

All good except that as we cleaned out the car before packing it with supplies, I left the registration in the "cleanup" at home.  So I had my driver's license, insurance card, credit cards. I even had the receipt for my payment on the lease of the vehicle (they send it to me by email)  I had everything but the registration.   THEY REFUSED TO LET ME OUT OF THE LOT !!!  I sat there as I pondered my alternatives.  Take a cab home and come back the next day to get the car?  Seemed crazy.

Anyway, I called the San Francisco Police and asked them to help.  They showed up and ran the registration on the vehicle.   An hour later I was on my way home.

Sort of funny but a bit nuts !!!!!
Add a comment...


The insurance companies will be watching certain aspects of ICD-9 to ICD-10 coding.  You might have used a rather general code in the past under ICD-9 and engaged in discussion or some sort of communication if there was any question as to the number of visits or type of treatment necessary.  Now, with ICD-10, the code itself will likely be the trigger for a number of authorized visits or treatments.  Now some of you will say, "for me, the ICD-9 code and my recommendation for treatment was enough".  Well all of that is in the past.   The danger is the the ICD-10 code will be considered to be a full and formal diagnosis.  The trouble is, you may not yet have MRI or other test results so the ICD-10 code, is TOO specific or at least TOO conclusory.  If test results come back inconclusive or confirm a related but perhaps less treatment intense diagnosis, the insurance company may question its payment.  In some cases, e.g. with large practices, practices that advertise or actively solicit business, the insurance company(ies) may collect data and argue that there is a pattern of billing abuse.

This type of claim opens you up to lawsuits and potential criminal prosecution.  

Will this LIKELY happen?   No, of course not.  But over the years, we have represented many medical professionals who were targeted for "fraud" when all that existed was an honest disagreement.

Just be aware.
Add a comment...
Wait while more posts are being loaded