Practice Areas:
- Appellate
- Business Torts and Contract Litigation
- Class Action
- Commercial Litigation
- First Amendment Defense
- Real Estate
- Trademark Litigation
Education
- Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva, Switzerland
Bar Admission
- California
- U.S. District Court Southern District of California
- U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, pro hac vice
- U.S. Court of Appeals 9th Circuit
Honors
- 2026 Lawdragon 500 Plaintiff Consumer Lawyers
- 2015 – 2017 Super Lawyers’ Southern California Rising Star
- 2021 – 2026 Southern California Super Lawyers list
- International Humanitarian Law Scholarship awarded by the International Committee of the Red Cross
In The News
Super Lawyers Featured Articles
- Super Lawyers 2026 article
- Super Lawyers 2025 article
- Super Lawyers 2024 article
- Super Lawyers 2023 article
- Super Lawyers 2022 article
- Super Lawyers 2022 article
- Super Lawyers 2021 article
- Super Lawyers 2017 article
Daily Journal Articles
- 2025 Daily Journal: $3 Million – Dependent Abuse & Wrongful Death Settlement
- 2022 Daily Journal: $4 Million – Dependent Abuse & Wrongful Death Settlement
- 2021 Daily Journal: $750,000 – Police Excessive Force Lawsuit Settlement
- 2020 Daily Journal: $4.65 Million – Police Excessive Force Lawsuit Settlement
News Wire Article
Yana Henriks delivers oral argument in Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Lopez, et al. v United States of America before Judges Friedland, Miller and Traum on April 24, 2026.
Representative Cases
► Blue Water Sunset, LLC v. Markowitz (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 477 [122 Cal.Rptr.3d 641]
► Unzueta v. Akopyan (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 199 [254 Cal.Rptr. 850]
► Unzueta v. Akopyan (2022) 85 Cal.App.5th 67 [301 Cal.Rptr.3d 93]
As matter of first impression, under California law, justification for peremptory strike of prospective juror on basis of disability (or disability of juror’s family member) is not permissible nondiscriminatory reason to support peremptory strike of prospective juror; As matter of first impression, prospective juror is member of a cognizable class for purposes of a Batson–Wheeler motion if the juror has or is perceived to have a listed characteristic in statute prohibiting discrimination; and As a matter of first impression, although race-neutral, the doctor’s counsel’s justifications for peremptory strikes of prospective jurors in the medical malpractice action, namely that jurors’ family members were disabled, were discriminatory.
► Roe v. Centinela Valley Union High School District (Cal. Ct. App., Sept. 16, 2022, No. B311456) 2022 WL 4285177
The Roe v. Centinela Valley Union High School District (Cal. Ct. App., Sept. 16, 2022, No. B311456) 2022 WL 4285177 involved an appeal from grant of summary judgment motion based on striking the Plaintiff’s evidence as hearsay. On appeal, Plaintiff urged the Court of Appeal to recognize a new hearsay exception “for developmentally disabled victims of abuse.” Following disposition, twelve (12) non-profit organizations petitioned the Court of Appeals to certify the case for publication based on continuing issues of public interest. Although the request for publication was not granted, the change was made: one case at a time.
2021 Appeal – PDF
2022 Appeal – PDF
2022 FVAP Request – PDF
