Trials and Appeals

Bringing a lawsuit should be the last resort in dispute resolution and is optional. In most cases, defending a lawsuit is mandatory. In addition to the monetary expense associated with prosecuting or defending litigation, a client’s time, assets, and emotional commitments are significantly involved and the outcome is seldom certain.

In consideration of these factors, the attorneys at Hanes & Schutz, LLC approach the prospect of litigation cautiously, but when it is necessary to protect or assert the rights of clients, thoroughness and skilled presentation are the benchmarks of Hanes & Schutz, LLC. The firm is committed to aggressive trial advocacy, effectively combined with professionalism and civility to courts, counsel, and opposing parties. The guiding principal of the firm’s litigation practice is preparedness. While a fair settlement is often more appealing than proceeding to trial, opposing counsel will always understand that we are prepared and able to conduct rigorous and thorough trials and appeals if reasonable settlement is not possible.

Our areas of trial and appeal expertise include real estate, commercial transactions, personal injury, special governmental districts, and intellectual property, including patents, trademarks and copyrights.

In addition to having experience in all Colorado state courts, the firm’s attorneys practice frequently in the United States Federal Court for the District of Colorado and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. The firm’s attorneys are also admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. For particular cases the firm’s attorneys have been admitted pro hac vice in the Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York, the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington and other federal district courts.

Published cases involving significant aspects of law in various fields that have been litigated by Hanes & Schutz, LLC include:

Valmont Industries, Inc. v. Enresco, Inc., 170 U.S.P.Q. 481 (Colo. 1971)

Dulin v. West 528 P.2d 411 (Colo. App. 1974)

Walker v. Colorado Springs Sun, Inc., 538 P.2d 450 (Colo. 1975), cert. denied, 423 u.s. 1025 (1975).

Innovative Scuba Concepts, Inc. v. Feder Industries, Inc., 27 U.S.P Q.2d 1254, 819 F. Supp. 1487 (D.Colo.1993), rev’d. 26 F.3d 1112 (Fed. Cir. 1994)

Morris v. Askeland Enterprises, Inc., 17 P.3d 830 (Colo. App. 2000)

Debalco Enterprise, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of State, 32 P.3d 621 (Colo. App. 2001)

Martini v. Smith, 18 P.3d 776 (Colo. App. 2000); aff'd., 42 P.3d 629 (Colo. 2003)

Beach v. Beach, 56P.3d 1125 (Colo. App. 2002); rev'd. 74 P.3d 1 (Colo. 2003)

Langlois v. Board of County Commissioners, 78 P.3d 1154 (Colo. App. 2003)

In re Black Forest Fire/Rescue Protection District, 85 P.3d 591 (Colo. App. 2003)

Hensley v. Tri-QSI Denver Corp.,98 P.3d 965 (Colo.App.2004)

Todd v. Montana Silversmith Inc., 75 U.S.P. Q.2d 1598 (D. Colo. 2005)

Wilson v. Prentiss, 140 P.3d 288 (Colo. App. 2006)

This website is not intended to constitute legal advice and may not reflect the most current legal developments. The information contained in this website is provided only as general information. By posting and/or maintaining this website and its contents, Hanes & Schutz, LLC does not intend to solicit legal business from clients located in states or jurisdictions where Hanes & Schutz, LLC or its individual attorneys are not licensed or authorized to practice law.