Hildebrand, McLeod & Nelson, better known as the "Hildebrand Firm" had its start in 1926 when Cliff Hildebrand (1899-1977) decided to reject the safety and financial rewards of corporate law and become a standard bearer and advocate for the working man. It all came about when Cliff was fishing the Sacramento River outside of Dunsmuir, California and befriended a brakeman and fellow fisherman who worked for the Southern Pacific Railroad. Upon finding out that Cliff was a lawyer he proceeded to inform him that a number of his co-workers had suffered serious injury while at work for the railroad and that they were unable to find an attorney to represent them as it appeared they were all fearful of the railroad's power and influence. This intrigued Cliff, and he soon filed a half-dozen lawsuits against the railroad under the Federal Employers' Liability Act, a law enacted in 1908 as "a response to the special needs of railroad workers who are daily exposed to the risks inherent in railroad work and are helpless to provide adequately for their own safety." Sinkler vs. Missouri Pacific Railroad Co. (1957) 356 U.S. 326; 2 L.Ed.2d 799 at 802. Unlike workers in other U.S. industries, railroad workers did not have worker's compensation protection. Their only remedy was (and is) to bring suit under F.E.L.A.

Shortly after filing those cases, the Chief Claim Agent for the Southern Pacific Railroad contacted Cliff and indicated, in so many words, that the Southern Pacific did not settle cases with lawyers, that they go to trial and win every time, and further more that if he, Clifton Hildebrand, did not drop the cases that were filed, he would have him disbarred in six months time. Cliff responded by telling him that up until that time, he had not made up his mind as to what kind of law he wanted to practice, but he said, "Now I know. I'm going to specialize in suing the railroads, and particularly the Southern Pacific for injured railroad men who are hurt on the job."

From that threat, the journey began. During the ensuing years, Hildebrand, through settlements and trials won millions of dollars for railroaders hurt on the job as well as for the other injury victims involved in car crashes and construction accidents. He was the pioneer in F.E.L.A. litigation west of the Rocky Mountains and his appellate decisions helped shape the liberal application of F.E.L.A. from coast to coast.

Being a successful pioneer had its costs. True to their word, the Southern Pacific attempted to bring disbarment proceedings against Cliff in 1928. Investigators hired by the railroad persuaded two former clients to give statements indicating that their cases had been solicited. A state bar hearing was held and the charges were found to be bogus.

In 1930, Cliff was named as one of the original designated counsel for the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen.

In 1935, Hildebrand hired a young lawyer, Charles McLeod (1910-1991), to assist him with his burgeoning caseload. This association and later partnership was to last through both their lifetimes.

In 1939, through the instigation of the Western Pacific Railroad and the Southern Pacific, charges were again brought against Hildebrand for soliciting cases or what was popularly called "ambulance chasing". This was a long and costly case that ended up in the California Supreme Court. When the smoke cleared, the court found that the Western Pacific claims agents had gone directly to the widow of a trainman who had been killed at work after they knew she was represented by Hildebrand. They settled with her directly then prepared a statement for her to sign stating that Cliff had solicited her case. Her later testimony indicated that not only was Cliff recommended by a close friend, but that her late husband had known Cliff and had instructed her to secure his services in the event of an accident to him. The Court threw out the charges.

The team of Hildebrand and McLeod became so successful at winning just compensation for their clients that they became, in Cliff's words: "Public Enemy Number One" as far as west coast railroads were concerned. In 1948, they were attacked again. This time it was a consortium of the A.A.R. (Association of American Railroads), the Santa Fe and the Southern Pacific. Again numerous unsubstantiated charges of solicitation were brought along with the charge that cases were being "channeled" to the Hildebrand firm by the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen in violation of the Bar Associations rules of ethics.

This time the Bar Association, acting under a tremendous amount of political pressure put on it by the railroads, ordered that Cliff be suspended for four years from the practice of law. The Appellate Court reduced it to four months, and the Supreme Court of California determined that no discipline was warranted. But after grappling with the issue of "channeling", the court decided that it was against the Bar's rules for the Brotherhood to recommend and designate certain lawyers for their membership. Justice Traynor wrote a stinging dissent wherein he criticized the railroad claims practices and attorneys who were not competent to handle F.E.L.A. cases. Justice Carter concurred and added that it was one of the union's functions to select a competent attorney to assist an injured workman.

Thus, the Hildebrand firm resumed business when the Supreme Court decision came down at the end of 1950. While waiting for the courts to determine the matter, Cliff shifted his pending cases to his old friend George Bodel in Los Angeles and introduced him to the working of the F.E.L.A. The Bodel & Fogel firm existed for many years as the firm of Fogel, Feldman, Ostrow Ringler & Klevens. In the next 20 years the Hildebrand firm spawned many current attorneys working in the field, Dick Crow ran Hildebrand's office in Los Angeles and later became the Crow Firm. Cliff associated Carleton Reiter and Monte Bricker whose firm was know as Bricker, Zakovics, Querin, Thompson and Ritchy, and John Rossi in Denver where his practice is known as Rossi, Cox, and Vucinovich.

The railroads were not finished trying to derail Hildebrand. In 1963, they filed for an injunction in the Los Angeles Superior Court seeking to enjoin the Hildebrand firm from practicing law. Their plan was to keep the firm so busy defending their right to practice law that they would have neither the money nor time to represent injured railroad workers. While this state action was pending, the United States Supreme Court, in the matter of the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. the State of Virginia, issued an opinion holding that the union had every right to refer its injured members to a lawyer or firm "with a reputation for honesty and skill in representing plaintiffs in railroad personal injury litigation." The court stated that "injured workers or their families often fall prey on the one hand to persuasive claims adjusters eager to gain a quick and cheap settlement for their railroad employers, or on the other to lawyers either not competent to try these lawsuits against the able and experienced railroad counsel, or too willing to settle a case for a quick dollar."

The United States Supreme Court holding became the law of the land and the state action against Hildebrand was quickly dismissed.

In 1964 Cliff stole Frederick Nelson away from the Southern Pacific Law Department and thus gained a brilliant and persuasive trial attorney. In two years he was made a partner and the firm's name became Hildebrand, McLeod & Nelson, a name which is retained to date. In 1967, David Draheim was plucked away from the District Attorney's office expanding the trial staff to four lawyers. The firm continued to aggressively represent injured railroad workers and their families in all of the railroad crafts.

Following the retirement of Clifton Hildebrand and Charles McLeod in the late 1970s, Anthony Petru was hired fresh out of Law School in 1980. The firm continues today with the three partners, Mr. Nelson, Mr. Draheim, and Mr. Petru, all specializing in the areas of practice pioneered so many decades ago by Cliff Hildebrand