Amber Melius, a partner at Sawtelle-based Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir, has built an entertainment-focused litigation practice.
For her clients, Melius handles copyright, employment and contract disputes, among other challenges. She also has taken up government tort claims.
With the Business Journal, Melius discussed how she found her love of law, why she chose Los Angeles, and both the perks and challenges that new technology bring.
What sparked your interest in a legal career and how did you land on entertainment?
It’s somewhat embarrassing to admit, but I had no idea what a lawyer did until I started watching “L.A. Law” in the ’90s. Of course, “L.A. Law” is hardly a realistic picture of what we do as litigators, but it inspired me to learn more about the profession. That curiosity led me to pursue political science in college where I particularly enjoyed constitutional law and, ultimately, attend law school. I sought out entertainment because it’s fulfilling to play a role in helping individuals and companies thrive in such a competitive, stimulating and constantly-evolving industry.
Why Los Angeles for your career?
Other cities I’ve lived in were often dominated by a single industry – whether technology, healthcare or finance – which heavily influenced the types of litigation cases you’d encounter and could sometimes feel a bit limiting. While Los Angeles is also considered a “company town,” its entertainment-driven economy brings incredible diversity in the kinds of litigation you deal with, from employment and contract disputes to accounting to personal injury cases. On top of that, it’s hard not to be drawn to the lifestyle L.A. offers. With its sunny skies, mild winters, and an active, dynamic population, the city creates an energizing and uniquely welcoming atmosphere that’s hard to resist year-round.
How has your current firm enhanced your career trajectory?
My firm has significantly enhanced my career trajectory by providing exposure to a diverse range of industries and complex cases, broadening my expertise and skillset. The collaborative environment has helped me refine my strategic thinking and leadership abilities, which I, in turn, strive to instill in our junior lawyers. Additionally, the firm’s strong reputation and resources have opened doors to new opportunities for professional growth and development.
Tell me about your first trial win.
One of my earliest wins was a bench trial where I served as second chair. I was an associate at the time and had limited trial experience. It was a valuable lesson in courtroom procedure and served as the foundation developing my own presentation style. Both my colleague and the judge were very affirming and gave me the confidence to trust my instincts. It was a decisive victory for our client, made even more gratifying when the decision was upheld on appeal in a published opinion.
Which trial victory are you most proud of and why?
I am especially proud of a 2018 victory on behalf of a truly deserving client who was wronged by his longtime employer. The employer had promised him ownership in the company, but later reneged on that commitment. Midway through the trial, we faced an unexpected issue with our expert witness, leading to a disagreement between me and my co-chair on how best to proceed. Despite his decades of professional and trial experience surpassing mine, he placed his confidence in my judgment and trusted me to move forward with my proposed plan. The jury ultimately accepted our expert’s damages in full, and the case was recognized as one of California’s top verdicts for the year.
How have you and your team incorporated artificial intelligence into your practices and work?
Artificial intelligence plays an increasingly important role in various aspects of litigation, including research, case analysis, document review, drafting and case management. Often, it serves as the most efficient starting point when addressing complex issues. While AI offers tremendous potential in this field, it’s essential to use it responsibly and ensure that human oversight remains a key part of the process.
Does the growth of so-called “nuclear verdicts” and their damage awards concern you?
I understand the fallout, but I am not overly worried. For me, the term “nuclear” is not synonymous with “disproportionate.” In many cases, substantial damages are necessary to properly compensate victims for severe injuries or to address grossly negligent or intentional behavior. Perhaps it’s my background in political science, but I continue to trust the appellate process to ensure things remain balanced and don’t spiral out of control.
What challenges are the most difficult to manage for clients as the internet, social media and AI make the world smaller?
The expanse of the internet, social media and AI has made borders less relevant and threats more pervasive. We have seen an increasing volume of cases involving fake celebrity endorsements, name, image and likeness misappropriation and use of deepfakes. The most difficult challenges as they have affected clients in my practice include identifying and unmasking anonymous or offshore perpetrators; overcoming jurisdictional and cross-border enforcement barriers; dealing with slow and inconsistent content removal by platforms protected by liability shields; and quantifying and remedying financial and reputational harm. Both legal professionals and judges face an uphill battle to ensure that legal solutions can keep up with the fast and viral spread of harmful AI and other technology-driven content.
