Ms. Schnurer is a Principal of the Firm. Ms. Schnurer graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Politics from Scripps College in Claremont, California in 1995. She earned her law degree at the University of Notre Dame Law School in South Bend, Indiana in 1999. Ms. Schnurer is licensed to practice in the State of California.

        Upon graduation from law school, Ms. Schnurer began an extensive practice in estate planning, probate, trust administration, conservatorships, elder law, and probate and trust litigation in Palm Springs, California. After moving to San Diego, Ms. Schnurer has concentrated her practice in the litigation of complex class actions, securities fraud and shareholder derivative actions. In the context of shareholder derivative claims, Ms. Schnurer has been successful in remanding shareholder derivative suits from federal court to state court. For example, in Rabin v. Antioco, et al., No. 03CV1058 D (N.D. Tex.), a shareholder derivative suit brought on behalf of Blockbuster, Inc., the defendants removed the case to federal court based upon plaintiff's allegations of the defendants' violations of federal securities laws. Ms. Schnurer successfully argued that the allegations of the defendants' violations of federal securities were merely used as support for the defendants' violations of state fiduciary laws and were not essential in determining whether or not the defendants breached their fiduciary duties under state law. Then again, in Fathergill v. Rouleau, et al., No. 03CV0879 D (N.D. Tex), a shareholder derivative suit on behalf of Michaels Stores, Inc., the defendants claimed that the case should be removed to federal court because plaintiff's allegations of federal securities violations had to be adjudicated in order to resolve plaintiff's state law claims. Ms. Schnurer once again successfully argued that the allegations of federal securities violations were peripheral to the state law issues and that the state law allegations did not involve the resolution of a substantial question of federal law. Both cases were remanded and plaintiffs in both actions were awarded their attorneys' fees and costs incurred in connection with defendants' improvident removal. See Young ex rel. Blockbuster, Inc. v. Antioco, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13786 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 6, 2003); Fathergill v. Rouleau, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10654 (N.D. Tex. June 23, 2003).