After the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, ruled that the client’s petition for compensation under the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 should be dismissed as untimely, Mr. Fishman moved for an award of attorneys’ fees on behalf of the client. By a vote of 7-6 the Federal Circuit agreed that fees could be awarded to the client even though her petition had been denied. The Solicitor General of the United States then sought review of that decision in the United States Supreme Court, which was granted. Mr. Fishman briefed and argued the case before the Supreme Court and on May 20, 2013 the Court issued its unanimous opinion affirming the Federal Circuit’s decision in favor of the client. See Sebelius v. Cloer, 569 U.S. 369, 133 S.Ct. 1886 (2013).
Following the entry of a guilty plea, client was sentenced to 84 months imprisonment. The sentence was based, in part, on the district court’s conclusion that the client was subject to a 4-level sentencing enhancement because he was guilty of illegally possessing ammunition “in connection with” the commission of two other felony offenses. Mr. Fishman was appointed to represent the client in the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which reversed and remanded the case for resentencing. The Tenth Circuit agreed that neither basis of the district court’s 4-level enhancement was valid, and it rejected the government’s contention that the arguments in favor of reversal had been waived because they were raised for the first time on appeal. United States v. Eddington, 65 F.4th 1231 (10th Cir. 2023).
Client’s medical malpractice case was thrown out because the district court ruled that her expert testimony on the issue of causation was not admissible under Colorado law. Mr. Fishman was retained to appeal the trial court’s entry of summary judgment against the client. The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the evidence of causation was admissible under Colorado law and it remanded the case for trial. Defendants and a number of amici sought review of that decision in the Colorado Supreme Court, which denied the request. Dean v. Catholic Health Initiatives Colo., No. 19CA0987 (Colo.App. Nov. 19, 2020).
Client sued the United States for injuries sustained in a bicycle crash on the government’s property. The district court found the government liable for its negligence and awarded the client damages. The government appealed and the Tenth Circuit reversed, but remanded the case for the district court to consider whether the government could be held liable on a theory other than simple negligence. On remand, the district court again found in favor of the client, concluding the government had willfully failed to guard against the danger that caused the client’s injuries, and it awarded the client and his wife approximately $7 million in damages. The government appealed again. Mr. Fishman was retained to brief and argue the case before the appellate court. The Tenth Circuit not only affirmed the district court’s judgment in favor of the client, the case was then remanded to the district court to determine whether to award the client the attorneys’ fees he incurred in suing the government. Nelson v. United States, 915 F.3d 1243 (10th Cir. 2019).
Client was sued by a London-based bank for more than $43 million following the failure of a coal mining operation. Mr. Fishman was retained to help develop legal strategies to defend the client, first in the district court and later before the United States Court of Appeals for Tenth Circuit. The district court eventually dismissed the case in its entirety. The bank then appealed to the Tenth Circuit, which affirmed the dismissal of the bank’s case. The client then moved for an award of attorneys’ fees in the district court, but the district court denied the motion ruling there was no legal basis for making the bank pay the client’s fees. The client appealed to the Tenth Circuit, which reversed and instructed the trial court to reconsider the arguments advanced by the client in support of its motion for fees. A short time later, the parties settled the matter. See Standard Bank, PLC v. Runge, Inc., 443 Fed.Appx. 347 (10th Cir.2011) & 557 Fed.Appx. 778 (10th Cir.2014).
Client was convicted of sexual assault at trial and received an indeterminate life sentence. Mr. Fishman was retained to appeal the conviction. The Colorado Court of Appeals ruled that insufficient evidence had been presented at trial to support the jury’s verdict. The Court vacated the judgment of conviction and sentence; precluding further prosecution or retrial. See People v. Tonsing, No.08CA1943 (Colo.App. June 16, 2011).
Client sued the United States under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries resulting from an automobile accident. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the government holding that it could not be held liable for the client’s injuries as a matter of law. Mr. Fishman appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which reversed the trial court’s judgment and reinstated the client’s claims against the government. See Fowler v. United States, 647 F.3d 1232 (10th Cir.2011).
Client and his company were sued for various business torts and contract-related claims. After an unfavorable verdict (including damages and an award of attorneys’ fees) was entered against the client, Mr. Fishman was retained to prosecute the appeal. The Colorado Court of Appeals overturned the adverse verdict in its entirety and ordered that the security that erroneously had been posted on behalf of both the client and his company should be released and returned to the client. Fremling v. Saber, 2010 WL 2442714 (Colo.App. Feb. 11, 2011).
Client was convicted of assault at trial. After one unsuccessful appeal, Mr. Fishman was retained to prosecute the appeal further. The Colorado Supreme Court granted the client’s petition for review of the case and, after oral argument, remanded the case to the Colorado Court of Appeals which overturned the client’s conviction and ordered that the charges against the client be dismissed. See Doumbouya v. City and County of Denver, 224 P.3d 425 (Colo.App.2009).
Client was convicted of several charges, including child abuse resulting in death, and sentenced to over twenty years in prison. Mr. Fishman was appointed to represent the client on appeal. The Colorado Court of Appeals overturned the conviction. The prosecution then sought (and obtained) review by the Colorado Supreme Court, which affirmed the Court of Appeals and granted the client a new trial. See People v. Weinreich, 119 P.3d 1073 (Colo.2005)
Client obtained more than a million dollar verdict at trial against his insurance carrier. On appeal, the defendant succeeded in having the verdict thrown out. Mr. Fishman was then retained to seek review in the Colorado Supreme Court. Review was granted and the Supreme Court reinstated the verdict in its entirety, including the trial court’s award of punitive damages in favor of the client. See William Coors v. Security Life of Denver, 112 P.3d 59 (Colo.2005)
Client brought suit against a bank and its president alleging various business torts. The trial court dismissed the client’s claims. Mr. Fishman was then retained to prosecute the appeal. The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed the trial court and reinstated all of client’s claims. Peak Card Service, Inc. v. Pueblo Bank and Trust, 2003WL359792 (Colo.App. Feb. 20, 2003). Mr. Fishman then drafted motions that defeated the defendant’s attempt to again have the claims thrown out by the trial court. At trial, Mr. Fishman argued the many legal issues implicated in the case, and drafted the proposed jury instructions. The trial court adopted the instructions proposed on behalf of the client, and the defendants settled the case after the jury instruction conference and before closing arguments.
A group of clients sued local officials under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 claiming that the officials had systematically violated their constitutional rights. The trial court dismissed the clients’ claims. Mr. Fishman was then retained to appeal the adverse decision, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit reversed and reinstated the clients’ claims. Defendants settled the case shortly thereafter. See Anaya v. Crossroads Managed Care Systems, Inc., 195 F.3d 584 (10th Cir.1999).
