Tom McNamara

Tom McNamara

Partner

P: 303.892.7349

F: 303.893.1379

Location

Denver

Assistant

Bernie Marquez

P: 303.892.7556

Admitted In

  • Colorado

Tom McNamara is a partner in Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP’s Trial Department. He graduated summa cum laude from the University of Minnesota in 1987 (B.A. International Relations/African History and Development). He received his formal legal education at the Yale Law School where he graduated in 1990.

Mr. McNamara joined DGS in 1990. He is admitted to practice law in the State of Colorado, the United States District Courts for the Districts of Colorado, Northern Illinois, and Northern Texas, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado, the United States Court of Federal Claims, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth and Tenth Circuits, the United States Supreme Court and several other United States jurisdictions. He is a member of the Denver, Colorado, American and International Bar Associations.

Mr. McNamara’s dispute resolution practice focuses primarily on natural resources matters. However, he also has worked with the banking, securities, financial services, telecommunications, geospatial imaging, hospitality, and consumer products industries.

He has specialized knowledge and experience concerning litigation of unique international law issues including: service of legal process abroad; personal jurisdiction of United States courts over foreign parties; subject matter jurisdiction of United States courts over international disputes; foreign sovereign immunity; enforcement of forum selection and choice-of-law provisions; forum non conveniens (inconvenient forum) doctrine; comity among nations considerations; obtaining evidence (testimonial, documentary and physical) abroad for use in United States lawsuits; enforcement of foreign judgments in the United States; international corruption; and international arbitration. Mr. McNamara also coordinates litigation abroad for United States parties.

In addition to dispute resolution, Mr. McNamara regularly advises clients on regulatory matters (particularly oil, gas and mining regulations and use of public lands) and compliance with domestic and foreign law including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the UK Bribery Act, other anti-corruption legislation, international sanctions regimes and international export compliance. He also advises on commercial contracts and transactional matters, particularly in the areas of oil, gas and mining, international sales of goods and other international transactions.

He is conversant in Spanish. Mr. McNamara also has studied and has some reading comprehension (but is not fluent) in French, Chinese and Chichewa. He has recently published articles on transnational forum selection, forum non conveniens, international sales, export controls and foreign sovereign immunity issues in the International Lawyer, the Colorado Lawyer, Business Law International, Ars Juris (Mexico) and Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional (Colombia). He frequently lectures on dispute resolution and private international law topics both in the United States and abroad. Mr. McNamara is past Co-Chair of the American Bar Association’s International Litigation Working Group on Transnational Discovery. He is a member of the International Bar Association and past President of the Colorado Bar Association’s International Law Section. He is a member of numerous other organizations involved in international issues. Mr. McNamara has been selected repeatedly by his peers from around the world as one of the leading litigators in Colorado in such publications as: International Who’s Who of Commercial Litigators, Guide to the Leading U.S. Litigation Lawyers, Corporate Counsel Blackbook and Colorado Superlawyers (2006 - 2014). He is “AV” peer-rated by Lexis-Nexis Martindale-Hubbell (which is the highest rating available in such system). Mr. McNamara is DGS’ liaison to Lex Mundi, the largest and most prominent international law firm network.

Substantively, his diverse practice includes litigation related to: oil and gas; mining; natural resources; contractual and business relationships; commercial torts (fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, intentional interference with contract, fraudulent conveyance, conversion, misrepresentation, etc…); foreign sovereign immunity; the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act; securities disputes; wrongful death and personal injury; real estate; broker-dealer liquidations; collection of judgments; employment; banking; and bankruptcy. The following are recent examples of Mr. McNamara’s practice:

Education

Yale University, J.D., 1990
University of Minnesota, B.A., summa cum laude, 1987

Tom McNamara es un socio de Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP en el departamento de litigación. Después de graduarse de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Yale (en New Haven, Connecticut), Sr. McNamara ingresó en DGS en 1990. Él tiene autorización oficial para ejercer el derecho en los tribunales del Estado de Colorado (ambos los tribunales federales y del estado) y en otras jurisdicciones de los Estados Unidos. Sr. McNamara es un miembro del Colegio de Abogados de Denver, Colorado y del Colegio de la Abogacía Americana. 

Sr. McNamara tiene experiencia extensa en litigación y arbitraje sobre negocios y comercio, incluyendo acciones tales como: los contratos y la infracción de contrato; los actos ilícitos o cuasidelitos (como fraude, dolo civil, apropiación ilícita, intromisión con contratos y relaciones contractuales); los daños con respecto a la persona y la propiedad; las finanzas; la bancarrota; los empleados; y las leyes antimonopólicas. 

En adición, más recientemente, Sr. McNamara ha desarrollado una especialización en los asuntos internacionales y las leyes internacionales. Este asunto incluye: la notificación de la demanda en países extranjeros; la jurisdicción de los tribunales de los Estados Unidos con relación a partes extranjeras; la teoría del tribunal inconveniente; el proceso de descubrimiento en países extranjeros; la soberanía de los países extranjeros; y la ejecución de sentencias extranjeras. Con frecuencia, Sr. McNamara trabaja con clientes y abogados de Latino América. 

Más información sobre el trabajo legal de Sr. McNamara (incluyendo ejemplos recientes y específicos) está disponible en el “PDF Profile” de Sr. McNamara en el sitio web de DGS. Sr. McNamara comenzó aprender español recientemente.

Recent Examples of International Practice

  • Represented subsidiaries of the national oil company of Venezuela and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (as amicus curiae) in a series of multi-billion dollar class-action lawsuits filed in Texas, Illinois, Ohio and Washington D.C. The actions alleged that Venezuela, other Member States of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and other entities were engaged in a conspiracy to fix and control world crude oil prices. The class plaintiffs asserted that the alleged conspiracy violated United States antitrust law. Mr. McNamara assisted the foreign sovereign in presenting amici arguments regarding the act of state, comity among nations and political question doctrines in one of the cases. In the other cases, Mr. McNamara represented subsidiaries of the national oil company of Venezuela. The cases were consolidated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas under Multidistrict Litigation procedures. In re Refined Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation, 528 F. Supp. 2d 1365 (J.P.M.L. 2007). Thereafter, the Defendants presented a motion to dismiss. The consolidated MDL proceedings were successfully dismissed based upon the act of state and political question doctrines. In re Refined Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation, 649 F. Supp. 2d 572 (S.D. Tex. 2009). The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of these class actions on the basis of the political question and act of state doctrines. Spectrum Stores, Inc., et al. v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., et al., 632 F.3d 938 (5th Cir. 2011). The United States Supreme Court denied certiorari in the cases. 132 S.Ct. 366 (2011).
  • Represented an Ecuadorian citizen as a defendant in high profile litigation in which Mr. McNamara’s client was falsely accused of accepting bribes to expedite the award of an important petroleum concession in Ecuador. The case received significant attention in the Ecuadorian press and had political and foreign policy overtones. Mr. McNamara presented international defenses based on lack of jurisdiction, improper service and forum non conveniens. The case also involved allegations concerning the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Mr. McNamara successfully won a judgment of dismissal of the Ecuadorian defendant and an award of costs within six months of retention. Grynberg v. Ivanhoe Energy, Inc., et al., 2009 WL 2486925 (D. Colo., August 11, 2009).
  • Represented a major global oil and gas company in royalty reporting and regulatory disputes involving the United States Government and a sovereign Indian Tribe.
  • Represented a British Virgin Islands natural resources investment fund and its Canadian investment advisor in pursuing collection of a multi-million dollar defaulted loan secured by gold mining assets in the United States and several foreign countries. Mr. McNamara conducted a successful contested foreclosure proceeding involving a Nevada gold mining property. The debtor gold mining company initiated a lawsuit against the foreign lender asserting breach of contract and a panoply of torts. Mr. McNamara (with Nevada co-counsel) prevailed in a lengthy preliminary injunction hearing and secured prompt dismissal of the lawsuit. The lender recovered the full value of its loan, interest, fees and costs.
  • Represented the national petroleum company of Bolivia in connection withcertain transactional and dispute resolution issues. The scope of therepresentation is confidential.
  • Represented two Canadian natural resources companies sued in a lawsuit brought by a Ghanaian corporation and dual Ghanaian-American citizen in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The Ghanaian plaintiffs sought to void contractual interests in an important gold mining concession in Ghana owned by Mr. McNamara’s clients and the Government of the Republic of Ghana. The plaintiffs asserted that the concession was worth billions of dollars in future sales revenue. The case involved threshold transnational issues of service, subject matter jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction and international comity among nations. Mr. McNamara (and other DG&S lawyers) successfully obtained dismissal of the case within one month after the lawsuit was served on the Canadian defendants in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Thereafter, the foreign plaintiffs brought a similar action in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Mr. McNamara obtained a discovery stay and prompt dismissal including an award of attorneys’ fees and costs. Oteng v. Golden Star Resources, Ltd., et al., 2009 WL 112791 (D. Colo., January 16, 2009); Oteng v. Golden Star Resources Ltd., et al., 2009 WL 1328856, 615 F. Supp. 2d 1228 (D. Colo., May 8, 2009). The decision was the first reported case in the United States to construe Ghanaian corporate and shareholder derivative law. Plaintiffs appealed the Judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Mr. McNamara secured dismissal of the appeal within one month after it was filed. Oteng v. Golden Star Resources Ltd., et al., No. 09-1244 (10th Cir.)
  • Represented a Canadian, publicly-held natural resources company in a lawsuit brought by an English limited company in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The action involved declaratory judgment and tortious interference claims concerning certain oil and gas concessions granted by the Israeli government for exploration of petroleum deposits off the western coast of Israel. Mr. McNamara filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue and application of foreign law. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained dismissal of all claims against his foreign client within weeks of his retention.
  • Represented a large German commercial bank, as local counsel, in connection with a $180 million loan default on a structured finance transaction. The matter involved bankruptcy proceedings and multiple lawsuits in state and federal courts in Colorado and other states.
  • Represented a sovereign Indian Tribe in litigation against the United States Government concerning breaches of trust duties particularly involving oil and gas assets.
  • Represented the national oil company of Venezuela and certain affiliates in a multi-billion dollar dispute concerning oil and gas in the south Caribbean Sea. The American plaintiff asserted business tort and antitrust claims against the Venezuelan companies. However, the real thrust of the case involved the determination of maritime boundaries between Venezuela and Grenada. The matter concerned issues including foreign sovereign immunity, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, failure of international service, forum non conveniens, act of state and international comity. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained dismissal for foreign sovereign immunity in the trial court. RSM Production Corp. v. Petrόleos de Venezuela, S.A., et al., 338 F. Supp. 2d 1208 (D. Colo. 2004). On appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Mr. McNamara secured dismissal of the appeal along with the payment of certain costs to his clients after full merits briefing.
  • Assisted numerous domestic and foreign natural resources companies in connection with contract negotiations and preparation.
  • Represented approximately 100 Venezuelan creditors who were victims of one of the largest Ponzi schemes in history: the failure of Stanford International Bank Ltd. (Antigua and Barbuda). Mr. McNamara coordinated the legal representation and strategy with one of the best Venezuelan law firms. The case involved complicated international, securities, banking and insolvency issues. The matter is pending.
  • Represented a large Russian natural resources company as local counsel in a multi-billion dollar contract and business tort dispute with a Canadian mining company. The case involved the ownership, operation and control of one of the largest diamond deposits in the Russian Federation. The matter concerned issues of international service of process, lack of personal jurisdiction, forum non conveniens, comity among nations, parallel foreign proceedings and international discovery. Mr. McNamara and his co-counsel were successful in obtaining dismissal for lack of personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. The matter proceeded on appeal. Mr. McNamara successfully argued the appeal in the Colorado Court of Appeals which affirmed the dismissal. Archangel Diamond Corp. v. Arkhangelskgeoldobycha, et al., 94 P.3d 1208 (Colo. App. 2004). On further appeal, the Colorado Supreme Court again affirmed dismissal of Mr. McNamara’s client. Archangel Diamond Corp. v. LUKOIL and Arkhangelskgeoldobycha, 123 P.3d 1187 (Colo. 2005).
  • Represented 10 American school teachers who were savagely attacked in West Papua, Indonesia during 2002 in what the U.S. State Department referred to as: “an outrageous act of terrorism.” Two of the teachers were murdered, the rest were injured in the ambush. The representation was multi-faceted and involved legal, political and foreign policy issues all related to the Teacher Group’s search for justice (including identification and prosecution of those who perpetrated the attack as well as securing adequate compensation and medical care for the survivors). The matter was high profile, received wide-spread media coverage and resulted in federal legislation related to the case. Certain portions of the representation have been confidentially concluded. A criminal trial was conducted in Indonesia resulting in conviction of most of the perpetrators.
  • Defended a global coal mining company against allegations of wrongful surface use and environmental damage caused by underground operations of the largest Colorado coal mine. Successfully defeated an attempted injunction and secured dismissal of the case while keeping the mine open.
  • Represented a major U.S. coal company in a mine supply price arbitration with a large public utility. After completing a multi-week arbitration, obtained a favorable price determination for the long-term mining contract.
  • Represented world’s largest coal mine in dispute with oil and gas companies concerning multi-mineral development on federal lands. Representation ongoing. 
  • Represented numerous regional, national and foreign banks in many aspects of the banking business including: structuring and restructuring loans; preparing loan documents; preparing bond documents; conducting foreclosures, workouts and receiverships; prosecuting actions for collection of debt; and defending and prosecuting actions in courts.
  • Represented the Commonwealth of Australia with respect to certain foreign sovereign immunity issues in contract negotiations with an American university.
  • Represented the national telecommunications company of Venezuela and provided legal advice on certain foreign law issues.
  • Represented a large Latin American company in connection with allegations of bribery. Mr. McNamara assisted in a comprehensive internal investigation of alleged corruption.
  • Represented a subsidiary of the national oil company of Venezuela in a bankruptcy preference and fraudulent conveyance action filed in Missouri and related to crude oil shipments. The matter involved international service, jurisdiction, foreign sovereign immunity and bankruptcy issues. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained dismissal with prejudice of this U.S. $22.3 million case within five months after he was engaged.
  • Represented a Colorado-based natural resources company in a multi-million dollar business tort dispute with an Argentine company. The matter concerned the oil and gas sector. The case was the first to proceed under the Hague Service Convention after Argentina ratified the treaty effective in 2002. The legal issues included personal jurisdiction and international discovery (including the prosecution of depositions in Argentina). The matter was favorably settled.
  • Represented a large, United States-based satellite company in a series of multi-million dollar disputes with customers in Europe, the Middle East and Asia. The matters involved consideration of numerous international law issues within the framework of potential International Chamber of Commerce arbitrations and court litigation. Mr. McNamara assisted in negotiating favorable resolutions of the disputes with parties and counsel in Europe, the Middle East and Asia.
  • Participated as an advisor to the American delegation in bilateral negotiations between the United States and the Russian Federation regarding the Hague Service Convention and Hague Evidence Convention. Thereafter, Mr. McNamara participated as an American law expert in the Russian-American Symposium on Private International Law (2004) at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations-University (MGIMO). Mr. McNamara’s presentation was on personal jurisdiction and forum non conveniens law with special focus on Russian-oriented litigation.
  • Represented the French, French Polynesian and American founders of the French Polynesian cable television system in a multi-million dollar contract and business tort dispute with a major international media conglomerate concerning the ownership, operation and control of the system. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained dismissal of one case in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. He also obtained dismissal of another case in the Colorado State District Court for forum non conveniens and lack of personal jurisdiction. 
  • Represented an Israeli manufacturer of personal health products in a multi-million dollar contract dispute with an American secondary distributor and its English parent. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained early dismissal of the case in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado for lack of personal jurisdiction, lack of subject matter jurisdiction and forum non conveniens. 
  • Represented the most well-known ski resort in South America in a wrongful death and personal injury lawsuit stemming from a heli-ski helicopter crash in the Andes Mountains. Mr. McNamara litigated personal jurisdiction over Chilean parties, forum non conveniens, comity among nations and transnational discovery issues in the case in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The matter was favorably settled and dismissed after submission of motions to dismiss.
  • Represented a Canadian manufacturer of scuba diving products and apparel in an employee wrongful termination lawsuit. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained dismissal of the case (after only six months of litigation) in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.
  • Represented a Colorado-based oil and gas company in a dispute with an Argentine company over a negotiable instrument. The legal issues included international service and liability. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained a decision confirming proper service under Argentine law and the Hague Service Convention. Thereafter, the United States District Court for the District of Colorado entered judgment in favor of Mr. McNamara’s client for compensatory damages plus interest and attorneys’ fees and costs. Mr. McNamara assisted in successful enforcement of the award through the Argentine judicial process and provided expert testimony to the Argentine courts through the trial and appellate stages.
  • Represented a major Korean multi-national conglomerate in a multi-million dollar business tort action (fraud and fraudulent conveyance) against its former United States manager. Mr. McNamara assisted in lengthy litigation in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. The case ultimately settled on terms favorable to the Korean client.
  • Represented the Canadian subsidiary of a multi-national customer service provider in numerous alleged preference and fraudulent conveyance actions brought in United States bankruptcy courts. The majority of the cases were dismissed. The balance were successfully resolved through settlement.
  • Represented a SIPA Trustee in the then-largest securities broker-dealer liquidation in United States history. Mr. McNamara’s legal work included prosecution of numerous successful cases in the United States as well as foreign discovery and coordination of successful litigation in Germany and Hong Kong. The Hong Kong case resulted in one of the first judgments entered after the People’s Republic of China took control of Hong Kong and implemented legal changes incorporating Hong Kong as a Special Administrative Region. 
  • Represented a Mexican company and its American ownership in complicated foreign investment matters in Mexico. The project included analysis of Mexican contracts, coordination with counsel from Mexico and the United States, assessment of dispute resolution mechanisms and consideration of various international transactional issues including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The matter resulted in a substantial investment in Mexico.
  • Represented a Belgian-based computer software company in a breach of contract matter against a major United States software distributor. The matter involved International Chamber of Commerce arbitration issues. 
  • Represented an international telecommunications company (in United States bankruptcy) in assessing multi-million dollar avoidance and recovery claims against German officers, directors and shareholders. The assessment involved international service, personal jurisdiction, forum, discovery and enforcement issues.
  • Represented Canadian companies in connection with the potential enforcement of adverse United States judgments in Canada. The judgments were not enforced.
  • Represented an English law firm in connection with the recognition and enforcement in the United States of multiple judgments entered by the High Court in London, England. Mr. McNamara successfully obtained recognition of such judgments and assisted in enforcement in the United States.
  • Represented a Canadian manufacturer of safety clothing in a multi-million dollar contract and business tort dispute concerning the acquisition of a United States business unit. The matter involved personal jurisdiction, choice-of-law and international forum issues. The case ultimately settled on terms favorable to the Canadian client.
  • Represented a French iron recycler and manufacturer in connection with a multi-million dollar potential acquisition of assets from an American corporation through the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado. The French client participated in the bidding process.
  • Represented a United States bankruptcy Trustee in avoidance actions against Hong Kong corporations in the computer and high-technology area. The matter involved foreign discovery. The case ultimately settled on terms favorable to the American client.
  • Represented clients in connection with potential foreign criminal extraditions from the United States to France and Mexico.
  • Represented an Australian manufacturer of embroidery machinery in a wrongful termination dispute with its United States distributor. The matter involved international arbitration, forum and jurisdiction issues.
  • Represented a Colorado company in connection with potential sales of agricultural products to entities in the Russian Federation. The matter involved consideration of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and international trade issues.
  • Assisted (through an ABA International Litigation project) an African multi-national treaty organization covering 16 Francophone African countries in harmonizing international arbitration laws to facilitate United States direct foreign investment in Africa. 
November 2014

22 DGS Attorneys Named in Super Lawyers Business Edition

Twenty-two DGS lawyers have been designated "Super Lawyers" in the 2014 Super Lawyers Business Edition published by Thomson Reuters. The annual, national listing of top attorneys in the U.S. serves as a guide for the go-to attorneys in litigation, real estate, corporate finance, energy, and environmental law, among others. The selection process is multi-phased and includes independent research, peer nominations, and peer evaluations.

August 2013

La Practica de Derecho Internacional

La Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Montevideo

December 2012

Reflexiones Sobre la Inmunidad Soberana de la Nueva Ecopetrol S.A. (y sus Filiales) Ante Tribunales Estadounidenses

Revista Colombiana de Derecho Internacional

This Spanish language article examines certain aspects of the Colombian petroleum sector under the new legal framework restructuring the Colombian national petroleum company, Ecopetrol S.A. In particular, it considers the sovereign immunity implications of the transformation of Ecopetrol S.A. under Colombian and United States law and whether the entity should be considered as a "State" or an "agency or instrumentality of a State" that has the right to claim sovereign immunity as a defense in courts in the United States.

Read More...

July 2010

A Primer on Foreign Sovereign Immunity

Practical Law Publishing Ltd.

The doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity provides that a foreign state generally is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of another sovereign state. State immunity developed as an "undisputed principle of customary international law" and the law of nations based on core aspects of sovereignty applicable in common law, civil law and other judicial systems (see Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States, Chap. 5 at 390 (AU 1986) (Restatement Foreign Relations)). Until the mid -twentieth century, sovereign immunity from the jurisdiction of foreign courts was almost absolute. However, as governments and state enterprises became more and more active in commercial activities in the modern era, private entities interacting with foreign states attacked complete sovereign immunity as fundamentally unfair in eliminating judicial recourse and favoring state companies.

Read More...

January 2010

Foreign Sovereign Immunity During the New Nationalisation Wave

Business Law International (IBA)

The global financial crisis has spurred a substantial increase in economic intervention by industrial states and the creation of new state enterprises. Whether characterised as 'nationalisations', 'expropriations', 'bailouts', 'buyouts', 'recapitalisations', 'share purchases', 'asset protection schemes' or 'investments', in the last year, states engaged in virtually unprecedented actions to take partial or total public ownership of formerly private enterprises. Many of such interventions occurred in the financial sector. For example, the United Kingdom recently nationalised or obtained majority ownership of Northern Rock, Bradford & Bingley, Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland.

Read More...

April 2009

A Primer on Foreign Sovereign Immunity

Colorado Bar Association International Law Section

The doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity provides that a foreign state generally is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of another sovereign state.  State immunity developed as an ''undisputed principle of customary international law" I  and the law of nations based upon core aspects of sovereignty, applicable in common law, civil law and other judicial systems.

Read More...

June 2006

Two More Davis Graham & Stubbs Attorneys Selected for International Who's Who Guides

Davis Graham & Stubbs lawyers Deborah Friedman and Tom McNamara were recently recognized by Who’s Who Legal as among the leading lawyers worldwide in their respective fields. Ms. Friedman was named in The International Who’s Who of Mining Lawyers 2006, and Mr. McNamara was selected for The International Who’s Who of Commercial Litigators 2006.

Read More...

April 2006

13 Davis Graham & Stubbs Attorneys Named Super Lawyers

Thirteen lawyers at Davis Graham & Stubbs law firm have been named Super Lawyers by their peers in Colorado. Law & Politics magazine polled active Colorado lawyers for nominations to identify the best attorneys in more than 55 practice areas based on peer recognition and professional achievement. Super Lawyers involves an attorney-led research process for a diverse listing of the top lawyers from private practice, in-house counsel and the public sector in different geographic locations. Only 5 percent of the lawyers in each region are listed in Colorado Super Lawyers, co-published by Law & Politics and 5280 magazine.

Read More...

February 2006

A Primer of Foreign Sovereign Immunity

Union Internationale des Avocats Winter Seminar on International Civil Litigation and the United States of America

The doctrine of foreign sovereign immunity provides that a foreign state generally is immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of another sovereign state. State immunity developed as an "undisputed principle of customary internationallaw,,1 and the law of nations based upon core aspects of sovereignty applicable in common law, civil law and other judicial systems. Until the mid-Twentieth Century, sovereign immunity from the jurisdiction of foreign courts was almost absolute. However, as governments and state enterprises became more and more active in commercial activities in the modem era, private entities interacting with foreign states attacked complete sovereign immunity as fundamentally unfair in eliminating judicial recourse and favoring state companies.

A Primer of Foreign Sovereign Immunity (2006)

June 2004

The Role of Personal Jurisdiction and Forum Non Conveniens in International Litigation (Including Practical Experiences Involving Russian Litigants)

Presented To: Russian-American Symposium on Private International Law

Over the last decade, the United States and the Russian Federation (“Russia”) have dramatically transformed their relationship.  The two nations are now engaged in a robust partnership to their mutual benefit.1  The partnership involves a rich mosaic of issues important to modern societies.

Read More...

Graduating from Obscurity: The U.N. International Sale of Goods Convention

Second Annual Florida Bar International Litigation Update Conference

Sixteen years ago, the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (“CISG” or “Convention” )1 entered into force between the United States and ten other nations.  The CISG, a multilateral treaty that governs the rights and obligations of parties to international sales contracts, is the international functional equivalent of Article 2 of the Florida Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”).2

Read More

February 2003

U.N. Sale of Goods Convention: Finally Coming of Age?

The Colorado Lawyer

Fifteen years ago, the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (“CISG” or “Convention” ) “entered into force” (became effective) between the United States and ten other nations. The CISG, a multilateral treaty that governs the rights and obligations of parties to international sales contracts, is the international functional equivalent of Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code (“UCC”). The Convention was designed to foster foreign trade by making it easier and more economical to buy and sell raw materials, commodities, and manufactured goods through a unified legal approach.

Read More...

October 2001

Plaintiff's Diplomacy: Are There Any Limits on American Supercourts?

Almost two decades ago, Lord Denning (England) provided an insightful foreign perspective on the American legal system’s role in international litigation:

Read More...

November 2000

United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods

National Association of Purchasing Management Denver Affilate

July 2000

Forum Issues in International Litigation: Where and Why?

A. Importance of Forum

Forum means the place where a judicial action is pursued. The selection of forum in international cases may have important, sometimes even dispositive, impact on litigation. Within the broad framework of jurisdiction and venue rules, plaintiffs initially select the locale for litigation. Where multiple potential fora exist, forum selection criteria include, among other things: (1) the residency and location of the plaintiff; (2) the residency and location of the defendant; (3) the focal point of the action; (4) contract provisions, if any; (5) the location of witnesses; (6) the location of documents and physical evidence; (7) the most favorable law; (8) the possibility of
jury adjudication; (9) the location in which judgment will be enforced; and (10) other factors.

Read More...

April 2000

International Forum Selection and Forum Non Conveniens

The International Lawyer

International forum selection clauses are "an almost indispensable precondition to achievement of the orderliness and predictability essential to any international business transaction."98 Ever since the Supreme Court's seminal 1971 decision in M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.,99 U.S. courts have generally enforced such provisions based upon international comity, public policy, and contract law.100 International forum selection clauses may be challenged only on very limited grounds upon a clear showing that "enforcement would be unreasonable and unjust, or that the clause was invalid for such reasons as fraud or overreaching."101 In contrast to forum selection clauses, which are by nature contract based, the doctrine of forum non conveniens more broadly permits courts to "resist imposition upon [their] jurisdiction"102 if there is an "adequate alternative" forum103 and the balance of trial conveniences (including private and public interest factors) strongly favors the alternative forum.

Read More...

January 1996

Banker's Dilemma Resolved?: Administrative Freezes and The Automatic Stay

The Colorado Lawyer, Vol. 25, No. 1

Financial institutions often find themselves on the horns of a legal dilemma at the commencement of a bankruptcy proceeding. The so-called "banker's dilemma" develops when a financial institution claims a prepetition right of setoff in a debtor's deposit account. The bank is placed in the untenable position of choosing between: (1) watching its setoff rights disappear as the debtor depletes the account, or (2) risking violation of the bankruptcy automatic stay by placing an "administrative freeze" on the debtor's account. 

Read More...