Mr. Obbard supervises the research attorneys who support judges in civil departments. Mr. Obbard also assists in one of the Complex Litigation Departments, where he reviews filings, confers with the judge, and prepares memoranda and draft opinions for the judge's review.

As a self-represented litigant, I filed a lawsuit asserting that for purposes of the State Bar MCLE exemption in Bus & Prof Code 6070 the employees of the Superior Courts of the State of California are "employees of the State of California." I won. Why? Because "The presiding judge of each superior court is a state officer (Cal. Const., art. VI, § 16), who controls the hiring, firing, and supervision of superior court employees, or delegates those duties to the court’s executive officer. (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 10.603(c)(5), 10.610(a) and (c)(1).) The superior court is part of the state judicial branch (Cal. Const., art. VI, §§ 1 and 4), administered by the state Judicial Council (id., § 6), and funded through the state budget process. (See Gov. Code, § 68502.5.) Obbard’s salary is part of the superior court’s operations costs, for which the state is responsible. (Gov. Code, §§ 77200, 77003, subd. (a)(2).)" The Court concluded "Obbard is indeed a state employee." It was no Brown v. Board of Education, but it was a chance to right an annoying wrong. Given that the State Constitution says the superior courts are part of the judicial branch and the judicial branch is part of the state, how could the employees of the Superior Courts of the California not be "employees of the Superior Courts of the California"?

Mr. Obbard represented plaintiffs in class actions asserting antitrust, securities fraud, consumer fraud, and wage and hour claims. He was responsible for drafting complaints, discovery and briefs as well as communicating and coordinating with clients, co-counsel, and opposing counsel.

Mr. Obbard assisted judges deciding motions and case management issues in complex civil litigation. As a research attorney, he prepared memoranda and drafted orders in cases concerning trade secrets, Labor Code violations, consumer fraud, construction defects, and other matters. I addition, he frequently mediated disputes among counsel regarding discovery and scheduling issues. Representative cases include Clayworth v. Pfizer (antitrust), TSMC v. SMIC (trade secrets), Savaglio v. Wal-Mart (employee class action - Labor Code), In re Cellphone Fee Termination Cases (consumer class action - liquidated damage clause), and In re Clergy III (childhood sexual abuse).

Mr. Obbard represented employers in lawsuits involving discrimination, harassment, and related claims. In addition, he assisted in team efforts on two large commercial cases - CNF v. Gallagher and William Hill v. Carl Thoma. Mr. Obbard also served as judge pro tem in Alameda County small claims court.

Mr. Obbard represented employers in individual employment cases involving discrimination, harassment, breach of contract, and related claims. He took three cases to trial while an intern at the Alameda County Public Defender's Office, obtained restraining orders against workplace violence, and handled contested mattters before the Labor Commissioner. He joined the partnership in 1997.