Christina L. Costley

Christina L. Costley is an associate in the Business Trial practice group in the firm's Santa Barbara office.

Areas of Practice

Ms. Costley's practice focuses on the defense of public corporations in securities class actions and shareholder derivative actions. She also has experience representing corporations and individuals in SEC enforcement proceedings and internal investigations.

Ms. Costley previously was an associate in the securities litigation group at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.  Prior to entering private practice she worked as a criminal defense attorney in the Santa Clara County Office of the Public Defender, where she tried over fifteen cases to verdict.

Education

• J.D., University of California, Berkeley ("Boalt Hall") School of Law, 2003, California Law Review; Honors Moot Court Board
• B.A., University of California, Santa Barbara, with High Honors

Admissions

• California
• Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
• U.S. District Court for the Central and Northern Districts of California

Honors

• McBain Moot Court, Finalist (Best Brief Award)
• California Law Review
• Recipient of Prosser Award in Federal Criminal Law
• John F. Wilson / Community Service Award, given in recognition of outstanding legal service to pro bono clients, 2005-2007

Memberships

• California Bar
• Santa Barbara Women Lawyers

Articles

• "Who's Reading Your Emails?", Boardmember.com, December 16, 2008

Class Action Defense Strategy Law Blog Articles

• "Third Circuit Affirms District Court Order Granting Class Certification In Section 11 Securities Case", December 1, 2009

Corporate Securities Law Blog Articles

• "United States Supreme Court Limits Extraterritorial Reach Of Private Federal Securities Claims," July 30, 2010
• "Sixth Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of Securities Fraud Complaint Where Inference Of Scienter Was Not Supported By Sufficiently Particularized Allegations Of Fact", February 12, 2010
• "California Court Of Appeal Addresses Important Issues Affecting Shareholder Derivative Claims Under Delaware Law", January 4, 2010
• "Ninth Circuit Holds That Absence Of "Upjohn Warning" Does Not Bar Admissibility In Criminal Prosecution Of Statements Elicited By Corporate Counsel During Internal Investigation", October 8, 2009
• "Third Circuit Applies Tellabs To Reject Motive And Opportunity Test In Favor Of A "Holistic Approach" To Pleading Scienter In Securities Fraud Actions", June 18, 2009
• "Ninth Circuit Reaffirms Particularity Requirement In Securities Fraud Actions For Pleading Scienter", February 3, 2009
• "Ninth Circuit Rejects Theory Of "Collective Scienter" And Reaffirms Pre-Tellabs Authority Applying Heightened Requirements For Pleading Scienter In Securities Fraud Actions", December 4, 2008
• "Ninth Circuit Reverses Dismissal Of Securities Fraud Complaint On Loss Causation Grounds Despite Three-Month Delay Between Corrective Disclosure And Market Reaction", September 22, 2008
• "Second Circuit Rejects "Collective Scienter" Theory For Pleading A Securities Fraud Claim Against A Corporation", July 17, 2008
• "'Literally True'Statement In A Prospectus Can Still Support A Federal Securities Claim If, In Context, The Statement Is Materially Misleading", January 7, 2008
• "DOJ, Courts Lessen Pressure On Corporations To Deny Indemnification To Management Targets Of Prosecutions", November 5, 2007