Case Results

Past results are not a guarantee of outcome in current, or future matters

PEREZ AND BROWN OBTAIN DISMISSAL OF WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS AGAINST GROCERY STORE
Dismissed

PEREZ AND BROWN OBTAIN DISMISSAL OF WRONGFUL DISCHARGE CLAIMS AGAINST GROCERY STORE

On July 23, 2012, an international grocery store chain, represented by Kevin P. Perez and Christopher P. Brown, prevailed on a motion to dismiss prepared by attorneys Perez and Brown filed in Denver County District Court. The District Court found that Plaintiff’s claims for outrageous conduct were preempted by Colorado’s Woker’s Compensation Act and that Plaintiff’s claims for implied breach of contract were meritless because of a clear and conspicuous disclaimer in the employment handbook. The dismissal resulted in the complete dismissal of all claims against the grocery store.

NEMIROW AND BROWN OBTAIN DISMISSAL OF LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE
Defense judgment

NEMIROW AND BROWN OBTAIN DISMISSAL OF LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE

On March 12, 2012, a Colorado Springs lawyer, represented by Ronald Nemirow and Christopher P. Brown, prevailed on a motion for summary judgment prepared by attorneys Nemirow and Brown filed in El Paso County District Court. The District Court agreed with the Defendant that Plaintiff’s claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The dismissal resulted in the complete dismissal of all claims against the lawyer.

NEMIROW, MILLER AND BROWN OBTAIN DISMISSAL OF LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDING
Dismissed

NEMIROW, MILLER AND BROWN OBTAIN DISMISSAL OF LEGAL MALPRACTICE CLAIMS IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDING

On January 18, 2012, a bankruptcy lawyer and his law firm, represented by Ronald Nemirow, Nancy Miller and Christopher P. Brown, obtained an order dismissing all claims against them. In dismissing the claims, the Bankruptcy Court found that the lawyer did not attempt to collect debts discharged in bankruptcy, but rather, attempted to collect debts based on the Plaintiff’s post-petition conduct. The dismissal resulted in the complete dismissal of all claims against the lawyer.

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS SUMMARY JUDGMENT, FEE AWARD FOR HOA
Defense judgment

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS SUMMARY JUDGMENT, FEE AWARD FOR HOA

In August 2011 Miles Buckingham obtained an Order from the Arapahoe County District Court entering summary judgment against all claims of the Plaintiffs in a hard fought lawsuit. An attempt by the Plaintiffs to appeal the judgment was unsuccessful. After the case was remanded to the trial court, Buckingham successfully obtained an award of not just costs, but attorneys’ fees, against the Plaintiffs and in favor of the homeowners’ association client. In the suit, Plaintiffs claimed that the Association's Board of Directors and Architectural Control Committee acted outside of the scope of their authority in allowing a substantial renovation of a property near the homes of each Plaintiff. Plaintiffs also made allegations of statutory violations regarding the disclosure and production of information requested by a homeowner. Buckingham was able to demonstrate through the testimony of several witnesses, the governing documents of the community, and several points of statutory and common law that the Plaintiffs' claims were inappropriate for trial, and that the Court should find in favor of the defendant Association. While being sued is rarely a good experience, this result, obtained by defense counsel was very welcome to the Board and the members of the named community.

NEMIROW AND BROWN PREVAIL IN DECLARATORY JUDGMENT CASE
Judgment

NEMIROW AND BROWN PREVAIL IN DECLARATORY JUDGMENT CASE

On June 8, 2011 the Denver District Court found in favor of an insurance company, represented by Ronald Nemirow and Christopher P. Brown, after a two day bench trial regarding a coverage dispute. The insurance company, through attorneys Nemirow and Brown, successfully argued that the claims submitted by the Defendant were not covered under the terms of the applicable policy. The judgment confirmed that the insurance company had no obligation to pay the $1.6 million claim and allowed it to recoup over $100,000 it spent in defense of its insured in an underlying proceeding.

BUCKINGHAM WINS DEFENSE VERDICT FOR SUMMIT COUNTY HOA
Defense verdict

BUCKINGHAM WINS DEFENSE VERDICT FOR SUMMIT COUNTY HOA

In a trial ending on June 30, 2011, a Summit County jury sided with the defendant Homeowners’ Association in a case brought by a sub-association within the same community. The Plaintiff, representing more than one thousand time share interest holders, sued complaining that the dues structure for a luxury amenity in the mountain resort was improper, illegal and unjust. More than $1.2 million in damages were sought. After four days of jury trial in which three experts testified, the jury came back in favor Mr. Buckingham’s client. The claims, which had been brought under Colorado’s Common Interest Community Ownership Act (“CCIOA”), implicate a statutory right to attorneys’ fees for the prevailing party.

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST FEDERAL CLAIMS; DISMISSAL OF STATE CLAIMS AGAINST PHYSICIAN IN CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION
Defense judgment

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST FEDERAL CLAIMS; DISMISSAL OF STATE CLAIMS AGAINST PHYSICIAN IN CIVIL RIGHTS ACTION

In April 2011, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado entered an order of summary judgment against all Federal Civil Rights claims brought against Mr. Buckingham’s physician client. The Court additionally declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state malpractice claims, and dismissed them. The case was brought by a prisoner through counsel alleging violations of the prisoner’s civil rights and medical malpractice against the physician. The Orders were entered granting Mr. Buckingham’s motion which incorporated the testimony of the incarcerated Plaintiff and several of the Plaintiff’s many specifically retained expert witnesses. The case, minus the Federal Claims, has been re-filed in the state courts where Mr. Buckingham successfully moved to have the venue shifted away from the urban district strategically chosen by Plaintiff’s counsel.

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT, DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AGAINST MANUFACTURER
Dismissed

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS ORDER SETTING ASIDE DEFAULT, DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS AGAINST MANUFACTURER

In December 2010, Miles Buckingham secured two critical orders for his Michigan-based manufacturing client. The first set aside the entry of a default judgment against the client which had been entered before counsel was retained. The second obtained a dismissal of all claims against the manufacturer on the basis of a lack of personal jurisdiction. Because the order was entered pursuant to Rule 12, the client was awarded its fees and costs incurred in defending the action. The orders were granted on two motions Buckingham filed as the initial filings of the manufacturer in a product defect/product liability suit brought in Weld County, Colorado.

BUCKINGHAM GETS DEFENSE VERDICT FOR HOA AND MANAGER IN EAGLE COUNTY
Defense verdict

BUCKINGHAM GETS DEFENSE VERDICT FOR HOA AND MANAGER IN EAGLE COUNTY

A verdict for the defense came after a trial on the strongly contested claims of a former homeowner. The Plaintiff sued the homeowners’ association and its management company alleging impropriety in their efforts to collect on unpaid dues, assessments and attorney fees. The defendants, who were represented by Miles Buckingham, prevailed in a detailed findings of fact, conclusions of law and judgment entered by the Court after the trial to the bench.

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS DEFENSE VERDICT FOR HOA CLIENT
Defense verdict

BUCKINGHAM OBTAINS DEFENSE VERDICT FOR HOA CLIENT

In May 2013, attorney Miles Buckingham successfully defended a Jefferson County homeowners’ association and their management company against claims brought against them by two plaintiffs. The claimants alleged that the association and its manager failed to follow the rules and governing documents in the association in enforcing parking restrictions in the community, resulting in damage to their property. Plaintiffs’ counsel presented a spirited case to the Court, but the verdict favored the defendants who presented as witnesses the manager, the Board President, an involved resident and a representative of the company called upon to enforce the association’s rules.

Page 3of 4: 1 2 3 4