Dylan Bradley Carp

Dylan Bradley Carp: Attorney with Jackson Lewis P.C. AV stamp icon
  • Principal at Jackson Lewis P.C.
  • 50 California Street, 9th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94111
    View Dylan Bradley Carp's office location
  • Peer Reviews

    4.5/5.0 (12)
  • Profile Visibility [ i ]
Attorney Awards


Dylan B. Carp is a Principal in the San Francisco, California, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He is a Certified Specialist in Appellate Law by The State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.

Mr. Carp has argued 10 appeals before federal and state courts. In addition to appeals and writs, Mr. Carp focuses his practice on unfair competition and trade secrets law, having second chaired a three-month unfair competition jury trial.

Mr. Carp also handles all aspects of litigation in cases involving discrimination, harassment, disability, and wage and hour issues, including taking and defending depositions, briefing and arguing dispositive motions, and participating in mediations and settlement conferences. In addition to Mr. Carp’s litigation practice, he counsels employers on unfair competition, discrimination, harassment, and wage and hour issues.

Mr. Carp has lectured on ethics and appellate law and litigation tactics. Mr. Carp has also published articles on these and related topics. His article on statutory interpretation was cited by a California court of appeal.

Prior to joining Jackson Lewis in 2007, Mr. Carp had a general litigation practice and also litigated federal civil rights class actions.

Honors and Recognitions

Compliance Reporter, Lawyer of the Year (2005)

Published Works

• Measured Response, San Francisco Daily Journal (April 24, 2007) [Contributor]
• Show, Don’t Tell, San Francisco Daily Journal (March 26, 2007) [Contributor]
• Court Needs to Follow its Own Rule of Not Relying on Legislative History, San Francisco Daily Journal (Nov 15, 2006) [Contributor]
• Getting Arbitration Awards Reviewed Remains Unlikely, San Francisco Daily Journal (Oct 19, 2006) [Contributor]
• Mastering the Law on Requesting Judicial Notice on Appeal, ABA Appellate Practice Journal (Spring 2005) [Co-Author]
• Owners Who Deliberately Keep Themselves Ignorant of their Company’s Polluting Activities Likely to Face Criminal Liability under the Clean Water Act, Environmental Litigation Committee Newsletter (2003) [Author]
• Raising Issues on Appeal for the First Time, K&L Update: Appellate Briefs 6.3 (Oct 2002) [Author]
• Large and Small Business Owners Take Note: 'Private Attorney General' Actions Under California’s Unfair Competition Law, K&L Update: Cal. Litigation (Sept 2002) [Author]
• Out of Scalia’s Shadow, Liberty Magazine (Sept 1998) [Author]
• The Case of the Litigious Little Leaguer, 3 TEX. REV. L. & POLITICS 171 (1998) [Author]

Speeches and Presentations

•Participated as panel member in CLE discussion sponsored by the Bar Association of San Francisco on lawyer ethics at the appellate level
•Presented 1-hour national intra-firm CLE lecture on appellate courts’ discretion to address issues first raised on appeal
•Presented 30-minute national intra-firm lectures on petitioning for rehearing in the federal courts of appeals, the use of motions for judgment to preserve claims of error on appeal, and the use of supersedeas bonds to stay enforcement of judgment pending appeal


August 1, 2016

California Supreme Court on Arbitration Agreement Silent on Class Action Waivers

Does the court or the arbitrator decide whether the parties to an arbitration agreement intended class arbitration where the agreement does not contain an express class action waiver? The California Supreme Court responded that there is no “one-size-fits-all” answer and the issue is a matter of contract determined by state...


California Workplace Law
Employer Successfully Defends Rounding Policy by Showing It Did Not Disfavor Employees
December 14, 2018

A California appellate court held an employer’s use of a rounding policy for its non-exempt employees complied with California law because it did not disfavor employees. (Donohue v. AMN Services, LLC (Dec. 10, 2018) Case No.

By Dylan B. Carp

California Workplace Law
California Supreme Court Rebuffs Plaintiffs’ Attempt to Undo Their Agreements Waiving Second Meal Period
December 12, 2018

The California Supreme Court has upheld the ability of California health care workers who work more than twelve hours a day voluntarily to waive their second meal period, rebuffing plaintiffs’ argument that their voluntary waivers were unenforceable. (Gerard v. Orange Coast Memorial Medical Center (Dec. 10, 2018) Case No.

By Dylan B. Carp

Non-Compete & Trade Secrets Report
9th Circuit: Claims proceed in California despite French forum selection clause
April 25, 2016

A federal appeals court has held a forum selection clause in a non-disclosure agreement does not cover trade secret misappropriation and related claims that are not based on the agreement. In re Orange, S.A. v. United States District Court, 2016 U.S. Ap. LEXIS 648 (9th Cir.

By Dylan B. Car

Areas of Practice (4)

  • Class Actions and Complex Litigation
  • Non-Competes and Protection Against Unfair Competition
  • Retail and Consumer Goods
  • Media

Education & Credentials

Contact Information:
415-796-5425  Phone
(415) 394-9401  Fax
University Attended:
Hamilton College, B.A., Mathematics, magna cum laude, 1991
Law School Attended:
Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., 1998
Year of First Admission:
7th Circuit Court of Appeals; 9th Circuit Court of Appeals; California - E.D. Cal; California - S.D. Cal.; U.S. Court of Appeals, DC Circuit; 1999, Virginia; 1999, District of Columbia; 1998, California; U.S. Supreme Court; California - C.D. Cal; California - N.D. Cal

Professional Associations and Activities

•ABA Appellate Judges Conference, Council of Appellate Lawyers Member
•American Bar Association
•American Bar Association, Law Student Division, Judge for the West Regional National Appellate Advocacy Competition (2002)
•Bar Association of San Francisco, Appellate Practice Section Member
•Council of Appellate Lawyers
•Defense Research Institute (DRI), Appellate Practice Section, Amicus Committee Member
•Contributing editor, The Appellate Practice Journal, Appellate Practice Committee, Section of Litigation, American Bar Association
•Former Co-chair, Bar Liaison Subcommittee, Appellate Practice Committee, Section of Litigation, ABA


Peer Reviews

  • 4.5/5.0 (12 reviews)
  • High ethical standing icon
  • A Martindale-Hubbell Peer Rating reflects a combination of achieving a Very High General Ethical Standards rating and a Legal Ability numerical rating.
  • Legal Knowledge

  • Analytical Capability

  • Judgment

  • Communication

  • Legal Experience

  • 5.0/5.0 Rated by a Associate/Assistant General Counsel on 04/02/13 in Labor and Employment

  • 5.0/5.0 Rated by a Chief Legal Officer on 03/25/13 in Appellate Practice

    Dylan was a fellow staff attorney with our nonprofit legal aid organization for three years before he left us to go into private practice. He was very a capable litigator and we were sorry to see him leave.

    Dylan was a fellow staff attorney with our nonprofit legal aid organization for three years before he left us to go into private practice. He was very a capable litigator and we were sorry to see him leave. Read less

    Read less

See All 12 Reviews »

*Peer Reviews provided before April 15, 2008 are not displayed.

Documents (3)

Documents by this lawyer on Martindale.com

San Francisco, California

Contact Dylan Bradley Carp

Required Fields

Required Fields

By clicking on the "Submit" button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Martindale and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The Internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.