Skip to main content
David A. Cheit

David Cheit focuses his practice on civil litigation in a range of areas, including business disputes, false claims, real estate matters, employment harassment and discrimination cases, health care, and insurance coverage and bad faith claims.



  • Represented health system on breach of contract and statutory writ claims asserted against the County of Sacramento seeking reimbursement for emergency medical services provided to the indigent population; developed contract construction theory that led to $100-million settlement.°
  • Represented a hospital system in a >$1 billion civil-penalty action pursued by the California Insurance Commissioner under the Insurance Frauds Prevention Act (Cal. Ins. Code §§ 1871 et seq.). Developed legal theories and strategies that helped reduce the client's exposure and position the case for settlement.°
  • Represented a bank in a federal False Claims Act case brought by the California Attorney General involving the calculation and disclosure of foreign currency exchange rates.°
  • Represented a state-owned enterprise of the People’s Republic of China in an international arbitration proceeding relating to a wind energy investment; claimants initially sought $7 billion in damages.°
  • Defended city in dispute over validity, under California Constitution, of franchise fees in negotiated waste management franchise agreements.°
  • Represented a group of investors who were victims of a $100 million Ponzi scheme; successful assertion of constructive trust claim led to early priority recovery of proceeds.°
  • Represented D.J. Nelson Trust (Fruitridge Vista Water Company) in appellate litigation over the validity of the transfer of a punitive damage claim stemming from MTBE contamination of groundwater. The claim was transferred as part of a change in the form of ownership of the client’s business from a trust to a corporation. The Court of Appeal held that the transfer was not a prohibited assignment, because the punitive damage claim did not contain a personal tort element and because the corporate form was a mere continuation of the client’s business. J. Nelson v. ExxonMobil Corporation (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 633 (review granted, then dismissed after settlement).°
  • Defended Zurich Insurance Company in subrogation/indemnity claim brought by Home Insurance Company. Home alleged that it had paid an underinsured motorist claim due to a misrepresentation of policy limits by the attorney for Zurich's insured. Judgment of dismissal was affirmed by the Court of Appeal in Home Insurance Co. v. Zurich Insurance Co. (2002) 96 Cal. App. 4th 17.°
  • Defended insurance company in a multi-party commercial insurance bad faith jury trial. The plaintiffs alleged that the insurer failed to pay benefits under a builder's risk policy; insurer cross-complained for fraud relating to monthly payments advanced for alleged economic losses. Defense verdict on plaintiff's complaint and $1 million verdict for the insurer on cross-complaint, plus $550,000 in pre-judgment interest.°

°The above representations were handled by Mr. Cheit prior to his joining Greenberg Traurig, LLP.

  • Editor/Reporter, Berkeley Gazette and Richmond Independent, 1970-1982
  • Instructor, Sports Law, University of California Davis School of Law, 1995

Anerkennung durch den Markt

  • Listed, The Best Lawyers in America, Commercial Litigation, 2021
  • Member, California Bar Association, Current
    • Member, Litigation Section, Current
    • Member, Labor & Employment Law Section, Current


Akademische Ausbildung
  • B.A., University of California at Berkeley, 1974
  • J.D., University of California at Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall), 1985
  • California