Jeffrey L. Fisher

Special Counsel

Thank you for your interest. Before you communicate with one of our attorneys, please note: Any comments our attorneys share with you are general information and not legal advice. No attorney-client relationship will exist between you or your business and O’Melveny or any of its attorneys unless conflicts have been cleared, our management has given its approval, and an engagement letter has been signed. Meanwhile, you agree: we have no duty to advise you or provide you with legal assistance; you will not divulge any confidences or send any confidential or sensitive information to our attorneys (we are not in a position to keep it confidential and might be required to convey it to our clients); and, you may not use this contact to attempt to disqualify O’Melveny from representing other clients adverse to you or your business. By clicking "accept" you acknowledge receipt and agree to all of the terms of this paragraph and our Disclaimer.

pdf

Jeffrey Fisher, one of the nation’s leading Supreme Court practitioners and scholars, represents clients in high-stakes litigation involving a wide range of civil and criminal issues. He has argued 38 cases in the Court—including three so far this Term, and seven in the previous two Terms. Over the past several years, Jeff also has obtained more grants of certiorari than any other member of the private bar and also has the highest grant rate.

His successes include several landmark decisions. Among them:

  • Crawford v. Washington and Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, in which he persuaded the Court to adopt a new approach to the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause; 
  • Riley v. California, in which the Court for the first time applied the Fourth Amendment’s protections against unreasonable searches to digital information on smart phones; 
  • Endrew F. v. Douglas County Sch. Dist., in which the Court established the substantive standard for enforcing the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act; and 
  • Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado, in which the Court held that that the Constitution requires courts to consider juror testimony regarding deliberations when racial bias may have been a significant motivating factor in the decision to convict.
VIEW MORE

Honors & Awards

  • Chambers USA, Recognized Practitioner (Nationwide Appellate Law) (2019)
  • California Lawyer, California Lawyer of the Year (appellate law category) (2015 & 2008)
  • National Law Journal, 100 Most Influential Lawyers in America (2013 & 2006)
  • Lawyers Weekly USA, Lawyer of the Year (one of ten) (2009 & 2004)
  • National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Robert C. Heeney Memorial Award (organization’s highest honor) (2008)
  • The American Lawyer, “Fab 50” Litigators Under 45 (2007)
  • Daily Journal, Top 20 (in California) Under 40 (2007)
  • National Law Journal’s “40 Under 40” (one of ten lawyers “of special note” within group) (2005)
  • National Law Journal Lawyer of the Year, Runner-Up (2004)
  • Washington State Bar Association, Young Lawyers Division, Professionalism Award (2004)
  • Recipient, Order of the Coif, University of Michigan Law School (1997)

Admissions

Bar Admissions

  • California
  • Washington

Court Admissions

  • US Supreme Court and numerous federal courts of appeals

Education

  • University of Michigan Law School, J.D., 1997
  • Duke University, A.B., 1992