Diana P. Lytel

Diana P. Lytel

Attorney Profile

Top Rated Criminal Defense Attorney in Santa Barbara, CA

Lytel & Lytel, LLP
 | 225 East Carrillo Street, Suite 203
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Phone: 805-963-8100
Selected to Rising Stars: 2015 - 2017
Licensed Since: 2006
Practice Areas:
  • Criminal Defense (30%),
  • Personal Injury - General: Plaintiff (20%),
  • Civil Litigation: Defense (20%),
  • Criminal Defense: DUI/DWI (20%),
  • General Litigation (10%)
Attorney Profile

Diana Lytel focuses her practice on business, insurance and commercial litigation, with an emphasis in retail, premises liability, commercial transportation and general liability matters. She has aggressively defended a wide variety of high profile clients, including Fortune 500 companies, financial institutions, and insurance companies, along with small businesses and individuals in complex commercial and tort litigation. Lytel & Lytel, LLP also has an active, successful criminal defense practice.

While Ms. Lytel has considerable jury trial experience and courtroom successes, she also has adeptly managed hundreds of favorable outcomes for clients in mediation and arbitration. Diana's past experience includes senior level litigation roles with firms recognized as Super Lawyers®, Best Lawyers in America and also AV rated. She received her B.A. in Political Science from the University of California, Los Angeles where she also minored in Anthropology. Ms. Lytel received her J.D. from Loyola Law School, Los Angeles, in 2006.  Admitted to practice in the State of California, Ms. Lytel has experience in both federal and state courts.

Honors/Memberships/Service:

  • AV Rated | Highest Preeminent Martindale-Hubbell 5.0 out of 5.0 
  • 2015-2017 Super Lawyers® Rising Star | Southern California
  • 2015 & 2016 Top Women Attorneys | Southern California
  • Board of Directors | Association of Southern California Defense Counsel (ASCDC) 
  • Co-Chair of General/Premises Liability Committee | ASCDC
  • ASCDC Diversity | Committee Member 
  • DRI | Civil Litigation Defense Organization | Committee Member 
  • National Association of Professional Women
  • American Bar Association
  • Santa Barbara County Bar Association
  • Santa Barbara Barristers
  • Santa Barbara Women's Lawyers
  • Latina Lawyers Bar Association
  • Ventura County Bar Association
  • Ventura County Trial Lawyers Association
  • Los Angeles County Bar Association 

About Diana Lytel

Admitted: 2006, California

Professional Webpage: http://www.lytellaw.com/partners.html

Honors and Awards:

  • Board of Directors, Santa Barbara Womens Lawyers Foundation
  • Co-Chair Diversity Committee - Association of Southern California Defense Counsel
  • General Liability/Premises Liability Committee Co-Chair, Association of Southern California Defense Counsel
  • Board of Directors, Association of Southern California Defense Counsel

Special Licenses/Certifications:

  • Co-Chair Membership Guide Committee - DRI, Civil Litigation Defense Organization

Bar/Professional Activity:

  • Board of Directors - Association of Southern California Defense Counsel (ASCDC)
  • Women Lawyers of Ventura County
  • Los Angeles County Bar Association 
  • Ventura County Trial Lawyers Association
  • Ventura County Bar Association
  • Latina Lawyers Bar Association
  • Santa Barbara Women's Lawyers
  • Santa Barbara Barristers
  • Santa Barbara County Bar Association
  • American Bar Association
  • National Association of Professional Women
  • DRI
  • Diversity Committee - Association of Southern California Defense Counsel (ASCDC)

Scholarly Lectures and Writings:

  • In a June 23, 2014, Association of Southern California Defense Counsel (ASCDC) NEWSFLASH, Board of Director, Diana P. Lytel laid out a seminal case for business owners in California regarding the standard of care:  Verdugo v. Target Corporation. In a case with potentially explosive impact, the California Supreme Court decided in June of 2014 under what circumstances commercial property owners in California must have automatic external defibrillators (AED’s). The court found that retailers are not obligated to acquire AED’s in anticipation of potential medical emergencies. For retailers, the burden of maintaining AED’s, outweigh the foreseeability of harm., Co-Chair General Liability/Premises Liability Committee - ASCDC, Case Analysis: Verdugo v. Target Corporation, General Liability Alert - ASCDC
  • General liability alert for the Association of Southern California Defense Counsel regarding the Court of Appeal decision in Gonsalves v. Li (A140284).  The First District Court of Appeal ruled in January of 2015 that a party’s denial or lack of admission in response to requests for admissions cannot be used for impeachment purposes. The panel overturned a judgment of more than $1.2 million in favor of a BMW sales associate who was injured during a test drive that was a result of defendant’s alleged reckless driving. The Court of Appeal ruled that the trial court erred in the admitting (over defense counsel’s objections) various requests for admissions in which the defendant Li stated that he had insufficient information to admit or deny the supporting interrogatory responses. , Co-Chair Premises Liability/General Liability Committee - ASCDC, Gonsalves v. Li (A140284): Court of Appeal held that a party's denials of requests for admissions are inadmissible at trial where a party's conduct in litigation is not in issue, ASCDC - General Liability Alert

Verdicts and Settlements:

  • Multi-million dollar settlement in catastrophic injury case for major Fortune 500 company. Plaintiff was severely injured when defendant's merchandiser fell asleep at the wheel and crossed a double yellow-line in a rural area of Victorville, California. This was a clear liability case for defendants. The only issue was that of damages.  Plaintiff was represented by a well known attorney and demanded over $8,000,000.00. Injuries included comoplex femur fracture (with open reduction and implementation of rod and hardware), ankle fracture (open reduction internal fixation), foot fracture and a fractured clavicle (open reduction internal fixation). Plaintiff spent 10 days in the hospital. Once released, he underwent 3 separate surgeries and had the hardware removed from his clavicle. He would go onto have a fusion of his left foot. 2 additional surgeries were recommended. As a result, plaintiff suffered from chronic pain and had to walk with a cane. He had been rated with a 64% whole person impairment.  The parties mediated the case and were able to reach a mutually agreeable resolution at $2,100,000.00. All parties were pleased with the result. 
  • Settlement just prior to jury selection where we were successful in excluding plaintiff's reconstruction expert. The case itself dealt with a box truck versus tractor-trailer accident in which plaintiff lost his leg.  On the date of the incident, both drivers were northbound on Interstate 605 experiencing medium to heavy traffic just south of Live Oak in the city of Irwindale, California. Defendant’s driver was operating a Peterbilt tractor-trailer in the #3 lane at approximately 35-40 miles per hour, along with the flow of traffic in his lane. At the same time, plaintiff was driving a bob tail truck in the #4 lane on his way to a thrift store in Covina, California. Plaintiff was not using his seatbelt in violation of the law and was approaching a Freightliner tanker truck, driven by a non-party, which was moving approximately 5 miles per hour along with the slower traffic of the #4 lane. Defendant driver noticed plaintiff’s bob tail truck ahead of him and to his right as he approached. As defendant continued in the #3 lane, and was within perhaps one car length of plaintiff, plaintiff swerved suddenly and partially blocked the #3 lane of traffic. Plaintiff had either not provided himself with enough time to stop in his own #4 lane or was attempting to move into the faster #3 lane. Defendant immediately applied his brakes but was unable to stop before colliding with the bob tail truck which had cut him off. The force of the collision propelled plaintiff to the right and the right side of the bob tail truck collided with a concrete abutment wall. Plaintiff swerved back into the #4 lane and he collided with the rear of the Freightliner’s tanker in front of him, causing his truck to turn over on its side. The investigating officer who completed the Traffic Collision Report, assessed statements and the physical evidence at the scene, and determined the cause of the collision to be plaintiff who was in violation of California Vehicle Code §21658(a) - unsafe lane change. Despite this, plaintiff persisted in his claim. We successfully challenged plaintiff’s reconstruction expert and at that point, settlement was achieved.
  • Full defense verdict in case where we represented a moving company in a theft, negligence case.  Plaintiffs hired defendant moving company to move their furniture and personal belongings from their old residence in Brentwood to their new residence in Santa Monica, California. On the date of the move, employees of defendant arrived at plaintiffs Brentwood home to move among other things, a 2.5' x 2' x 2' safe. At around 2:00 p.m. on the same day, the employee defendants arrived at the plaintiffs Santa Monica residence to unload. Plaintiff was at the Santa Monica residence and watched while defendant employees moved the safe into the closet of the upstairs master bedroom. Later that evening at around 8:45 p.m., the employee defendants left for the day and told plaintiffs they would return on Monday to finish with the remainder of the move. Plaintiffs then left the premises at around 9:00 p.m. intending to return the next morning. During the night, the home was burglarized and the safe, along with all of its contents, was stolen. Plaintiffs alleged defendant’s employees had stolen the safe. Defendants denied any liability. After a 2.5 week jury trial, a verdict was rendered in favor of defendants.
  • Full defense verdict in wrongful death case arising our of a truck v. automobile accident. Plaintiff clipped the rear of defendants trailer while it was parked in a gore point between two major los angeles freeways. Jury deliberated less than 2 hours and came back with a defense verdict. A 998 was also in place and defendants recovered costs. 

Educational Background:

  • Loyola Law School, 2006
  • UCLA, 2002
Office Location for Diana P. Lytel

225 East Carrillo Street
Suite 203
Santa Barbara, CA 93101

 

Diana P. Lytel:

Last Updated: 5/29/2017

Page Generated: 0.2799289226532 sec