Robie & Matthai, A Professional Corporation | A Professional Corporation | Trial and Appellate Lawyers


Kyle Kveton

  Kyle Kveton

Kyle Kveton joined Robie & Matthai in 1987. He serves as the firm's "go to guy" whenever things get really complicated. His expertise in corporate and business law enables him to give practical advice to his clients whether they are in, or seeking to avoid, litigation.

His practice includes litigation of commercial disputes, defense of attorneys in malpractice and malicious prosecution actions, defense of claims against officers and directors, and litigation of insurance disputes.

Kyle has tried over thirty cases to verdict, and the broad range of his trial experience, from mold exposure claims to technical insurance issues to professional liability and partnership disputes, enables him to provide a realistic assessment of what a client faces when they choose to try, rather than settle, their dispute. If the choice is trial, Kyle's skill and determination, combined with his close working relationship with the client, provide the best possible trial presentation.


Kyle is also an integral part of the firm's appellate practice, regularly briefing and arguing matters in the courts of appeal. His clear, concise and straightforward approach has resulted in many favorable appellate decisions, which have established legal principles with impact far beyond the individual case. His work has clarified that in California mediation confidentiality is sacrosanct and that an intentional act, even when the insured did not intend to cause injury, is not a covered event when an injury is foreseeable.

Favorite Cases

Kyle regularly represented a national brand, privately held pet food company in both litigation and transactional matters. He successfully defended an attempted nationwide class action by defeating class certification, with the denial of certification affirmed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. He then recovered a multi-million dollar settlement for the client in litigation against a supplier.

Kyle was retained on eve of trial to defend an insurance broker against a multi-million dollar errors and omissions claim brought by an international entertainment company. He devised a strategy to permit a last-minute amended complaint to be filed by the plaintiff, and then successfully raised the statute of limitations defense on demurrer. Judgment in favor of the client was affirmed by Second District Court of Appeal, with review denied by California Supreme Court.

Kyle tried to a defense verdict one of first cases in Los Angeles County in which multiple plaintiffs alleged personal injuries due to exposure to mold. Kyle precluded expert testimony, from plaintiffs' nationally-known medical expert, as to the health effects of stachybotrys after an Evidence Code 402/405 hearing.

In Freedman v. State Farm Insurance Co. (2009), 173 Cal.App.4th 957, the Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment in favor of State Farm, confirming that the efficient proximate cause analysis, on which the insured sought to rely, was superseded by case law permitting insurers to draft and enforce policy provisions covering some, but not all, manifestations of a particular peril. A contractor, remodeling a bathroom, had driven a nail through a pipe while hanging new drywall. There was no leak at the time, but years later, corrosion around the nail caused a leak and extensive damage. Because of the exclusion for continuous or repeated seepage or leakage of water, the resulting property damage was not covered.

Kyle's work in Lamden v. La Jolla Shores (21 Cal.4th 249) set the standard by which decisions of a Board of Directors of a condominium association are judged. The California Supreme Court concluded: "Where a duly constituted community association board, upon reasonable investigation, in good faith and with regard for the best interest of the community association and its members, exercises discretion, within the scope of its authority under relevant statutes, covenants and restrictions, to select among means for discharging an obligation to maintain and repair a development's common areas, the court should defer to the board's authority and presumed expertise." "Thus, we adopt today for California courts a rule of judicial deference to community association board decision-making that applies, regardless of an association's corporate status, when owners in common-interest developments seek to litigate ordinary maintenance decisions entrusted to the discretion of their association's board of directors."

Kyle was retained shortly before trial to represent a law firm partner in a dispute with his former firm over a final distribution and accounting. He obtained a jury verdict for the entire amount of the partner's claim, in excess of $800,000.


  • Los Angeles County Bar Association
  • American Bar Association
    • Member, Business Law Section
  • Association of Business Trial Lawyers
  • Association of Southern California Defense Counsel
  • Defense Research Institute
  • State Bar of California


  • American Board of Trial Advocates
  • Senior Fellow: Litigation Counsel of America
  • Listed, Southern California Super Lawyers, 2005-present
  • Listed, Who's Who in America, 2006-present; Who's Who in American Law, 2006-present

Service to the Courts

  • Arbitrator and Mediator, Los Angeles Superior Court.

Presentations and Publications

  • Faculty Member: National Institute for Trial Advocacy, California Coast and Southern California Deposition Skills Program 2005-present
  • Faculty Member National Institute for Trial Advocacy, Southern California Regional Trial Skills Program, 2007-present
  • Faculty Member Jack Daniels L.A.-ABOTA Trial School, 2011-present
  • Panelist, "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly: Emerging and Perverse Claims Against Lawyers", 2018 Annual Legal Malpractice and Risk Management Conference
  • Panelist, "Ethical Issues Surrounding Mediation Confidentiality", State Bar of California Annual Meeting, 2016
  • Panelist, "Life After Cassel," Beverly Hills Bar Association (2012) and Southern California Mediation Association (2013)
  • Panelist, How to Climb Into Any Jury Box, State Bar of California Annual Meeting, 2012
  • Presenter, CNA Legal Malpractice Prevention Series 2006, 2007
  • Panelist, 2004 Annual Conference on Legal Malpractice and Risk Management---Trial of the Legal Malpractice Case
  • Panelist, Los Angeles County Bar Association, Perspectives on Mold Litigation, 2001
  • Los Angeles County Bar Association, A Mock Trial: Avoid becoming a Legal Malpractice Statistic, 2001
  • Panelist, National Business Institute, Bad Faith Litigation in California, 2000
  • Chapter Author, California Civil Discovery Practice, 4th Ed. (CEB 2006; update 2008)
  • "Advice and Counsel," Los Angeles Lawyer, September 2005
  • "Alive and Well (The Genuine Dispute Doctrine In First Party Cases)," Verdict, Fourth Quarter, 2007
  • "American Made" Los Angeles Lawyer, December 2008
  • Co-Author, "Parrish v. Latham Hasn't Changed Malicious Prosecution," Law360 (November 13, 2014)


  • University of Southern California, J.D., 1983
    • Member Hale Moot Court Honors Program, 1982
  • State University of New York at Binghamton, B.A., 1980


  • California Courts, 1983
  • U.S. District Court, Southern, 1992, Northern, 2009, Eastern, 1987 and Central,1983
  • U. S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 2008


213-706-8000 | 500 S. Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90071 | Fax 213-706-9913


Robie and Matthai, A Professional Corporation | Trial and Appelate Lawyers | Straightforward to the point This web site is designed for general information only. The information presented at this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship. [site map]