Practice areas: Personal Injury, General Litigation, Products Liability; view more
Licensed in California since: 1992
Education: University of the Pacific McGeorge School of Law
Selected to Super Lawyers: 2025 - 2026 Call today:
209-337-4505
Free Consultation Rosenthal Law
2251 Douglas Blvd.#120
Roseville, CA 95661 Visit website
S. David Rosenthal is the founding attorney of Rosenthal Law in Roseville, California, where he represents individuals in various personal injury matters. With a practice dedicated to advocating for injured clients, he handles cases involving car accidents, motorcycle accidents, trucking accidents, animal and dog bites, brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, defective and dangerous products, slip-and-fall incidents and wrongful death claims.
With over three decades of experience, Mr. Rosenthal has built a reputation for thorough preparation and a focus on clients. He works closely with individuals and families affected by serious injuries, focusing on protecting their rights and helping them navigate the challenges that often follow catastrophic accidents.
Mr. Rosenthal earned his Bachelor of Arts degree from California State University, Long Beach, in 1989. He went on to attend the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law, where he obtained his Juris Doctor in 1992. During law school, he shaped the legal knowledge and analytical skills that support his work in personal injury cases.
Active in the legal community, Mr. Rosenthal serves as a judge pro tem for both the Sacramento County Superior Court and the El Dorado County Superior Court. He is also a member of the American Association for Justice, the American Bar Association, the Sacramento County Bar Association, the Placer County Bar Association and the Consumer Attorneys of California. Additionally, he serves on the board of directors of the Capitol City Trial Lawyers Association, where he is the chair of the problem-solving clinic.
Admitted to practice in California in 1992, Mr. Rosenthal is also admitted to practice before the U.S. Federal District Court for the Eastern District of California, allowing him to represent clients in both state and federal courts. In recognition of many contributions, he has received an AV Preeminent* peer-review rating through Martindale-Hubbell, the organization’s highest distinction.
*AV®, AV Preeminent®, Martindale-Hubbell Distinguished and Martindale-Hubbell Notable are certification marks used under license in accordance with the Martindale-Hubbell certification procedures, standards and policies. Martindale-Hubbell® is the facilitator of a peer-review rating process. Ratings reflect the anonymous opinions of members of the bar and the judiciary. Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ fall into two categories – legal ability and general ethical standards.
Practice areas
Personal Injury - General: Plaintiff, General Litigation, Personal Injury - Products: PlaintiffFocus areas
Animal Bites, Brain Injury, Motor Vehicle Accidents, Personal Injury - Plaintiff, Premises Liability - Plaintiff, Trucking Accidents, Wrongful Death
- 60% Personal Injury - General: Plaintiff
- 20% General Litigation
- 20% Personal Injury - Products: Plaintiff
First Admitted: 1992, California
Professional Webpage: https://www.rosenthalinjurylaw.com/s-david-rosenthal/
Bar / Professional Activity
- Consumer Attorneys of California, 1995 to present
- Capital City Trial Lawyers Association, Vice President
- U.S. District Court Eastern District of California, 1992
- California, 1992
- Judge Pro Tem, El Dorado County Superior Court, 2000 to present
- Capitol City Trial Lawyers Association, Past President, Board of Directors, 2010 to Present
- Judge Pro Tem, Sacramento County Superior Court, 1998 to present
- The American Association for Justice, 1995 to present
- Multi-Million Dollar Advocate, Multi-Million Dollar Advocates Forum, 2018
Verdicts / Settlements (Case Results)
- $1,000,000 Settlement During Trial - Ingram v. Karavan, et al., Sacramento County Superior Court No. 34:2010-000686760. Plaintiff was a 51 year old African-American male who was in a moderate impact t-bone accident with a Garda armoured truck. Plaintiff had two prior injury vehicle accidents and had chronic low back pain from the most recent accident which was continuous up to the time of armoured truck accident. He initially sought treatment with a chiropractor who indicated that his symptoms had mostly resolved. However, he later ended up having low back surgery at U.C. Davis Medical Center. Prior to trial, the settlement offer was $575,000. During trial, the judge excluded evidence of my client having AIDS, which potentially would have decreased his life expectancy. Additionally, this case was tried shortly after the Howell v. Hamilton Meats decision, and the judge ruled after a 402 hearing in which the PMK's from the hospital for billing and insurance contracts testified, that plaintiff was able to claim the amount of the "balance bill", even though his health insurance had paid the bills and the remaining balance was only owed because of the existence of a third party case and a lien under C.C. §3045.1. Because of these rulings, and after opening statement, defendant's settlement offer increased over the first week of trial to $1,200,000. Despite my advice, plaintiff refused the offer. The jury was deadlocked and after deliberating 2 weeks, there was mistrial. The jury members indicated that some jurors did not like the plaintiff and that prevented a consensus. The case settled shortly thereafter for $1,000,000. , 2012
- $13,500,000 Settlement - Onate v. Pulley, State of California, County of Sacramento, Case No. 34-2016-00191904 - Amado Onate, a single 30 year old Health Net employee, sustained a major traumatic brain injury when he was struck by a delivery van operated by a State of California employee while he was riding his bike to work along Folsom Boulevard. The traffic collision report placed Mr. Onate at fault for veering out of the bike lane into the number two east bound lane directly in front of the State van. There was evidence our client had been riding east bound on Folsom when he moved to the left to avoid some branches that extended from two trees on the south shoulder into the bike lane before being hit. The van driver testified that he was in the number two lane when the right front corner of his van suddenly and unexpectedly struck something. One witness’ testimony seemed to corroborate the van driver’s version. Another witness’ testimony was that the impact occurred "near" the white line separating the traffic lane from the bike lane. The investigating officer placed the point of impact in the traffic lane and concluded that our client’s violation of Vehicle Code §22107 caused the collision. We sued the driver of the van and the State of California alleging that even if our client had left the bike lane, defendant had seen our client in the bike lane as he approached and violated Vehicle Code §21760, the Three Feet for Safety Act, by failing to give adequate space as he passed. We also sued the County of Sacramento and Regional Transit, the entities potentially responsible for maintaining the trees and keeping the bike lane free of obstructions. Ultimately we were able to establish that the County was responsible for maintaining trees within County rights of way and that the tree branches in the bike lane were in violation of §12.12.035 of the County Code, which requires that trees be trimmed to provide 14.5 feet of clearance over roadways. The County alleged that even if the trees obstructed part of the bike lane, our client was at fault for leaving the bike lane since the branches extended only half way into the lane. Video taken by our investigator shortly after the incident showed bicycles moving to the left to avoid the branches but staying within the lane. Both defendants also alleged that our client’s failure to wear a helmet was comparative fault and the cause of all or some of his brain injury. Both sides retained experts to address this issue. Mr. Onate was close with his four sisters and had a girlfriend of 10 years at the time of his injury. He worked as a customer service representative for Health Net. As a result of his injuries he will not be able to work again and will require lifetime medical attention which was detailed in a Life Care Plan created by Deborah Doherty, M.D. The State of California contributed $10,000,000 and the County contributed $3,500,000 to the settlement, which included the establishment of a Special Needs Trust and Medicare Set Aside arrangement., 2018
Educational Background
- Long Beach State University, B.S., Political Science, 1989
Scholarly Lectures / Writings
- Speaker at the annual CAOC Tahoe Seminar on the subject of ERISA liens. , Speaker, ERISA Liens - Self Funded vs. Insured, Consumer Attorneys Of California, 2009
- Speaker at the CAOC Annual Convention in San Francisco regarding procedure, advantages and other considerations of expedited trials., Speaker, Expedited Jury Trial, Consumer Attorneys Of California, 2011
- Speaker in 2002 and 2010 at Problem Solving Clinics regarding effective use of requests for admissions in civil litigation. , Speaker, Request for Admissions, Capital City Trial Lawyers, 2002
- Speaker at Problem Solving Clinic regarding the law and strategies pertaining to discovery in the typical auto liability civil litigation case., Speaker, Discovery in Auto Litigation Cases, Capital City Trial Lawyers Association, 2004
- Article regarding experience with the first expedited trial in San Francisco County. Used by both CCTLA and SFTLA and, later, by ABOTA. , Author, Lessons of an Expedited Trial, The Litigator, Capitol City Trial Lawyers Assocation; San Francisco Trial Lawyers Association; ABOTA, 2011
- Article regarding the law and strategy of use of requests for admissions in civil litigation., Author, Request for Admissions, Putting the Defendant in a Catch 22, The Litigator, Capital City Trial Lawyers Association, 2002
- Article describing the discovery conducted and evidence mustered in a unique public entity case in which the allegation was that negligent maintenance of a tree partially blocking a bike lane caused a bicyclist to veer into the roadway where he was struck and sustained a major traumatic brain injury. The case resulted in a multi-million dollar recovery against the public entity defendant., Author, Lessons of a Dangerous Condition of Public Property Case, Litigator Magazine, Capitol City Trial Lawyers, 2018
Honors
- AV® Preeminent Peer Review Rated by Martindale-Hubbell®, 2016
- International Moot Court Competition, Finalist
- SuperLawyer, Thompson Reuters, 2025
Selections
- Super Lawyers: 2025 - 2026
