United States Tenth Circuit

In a dispute arising out of a contingent fee agreement entered into by plaintiff and defendant, a California attorney, in connection with defendant's assistance in selling stock plaintiff owned in a closely held company, rulings adverse to defendant are reversed: 1) as to dismissal of defendant's breach of contract claim where the district court erred in applying Colorado law to determine the validity of a Fee Agreement, as opposed to California law; and 2) as to dismissal of fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/06/2006
• Published 09/06/2006

Judges

• MURPHY, Circuit Judge., Before MURPHY, BALDOCK, and McCONNELL, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Ronald S. Rauchberg, Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, New York (Norman Brownstein, Timothy R. Beyer, Richard P. Barkley, Josephine Sandler, Brownstein Hyatt & Farber, P.C., Denver, Colorado, Ian L. Saffer and Chad King, Townsend & Townsend & Crew, LLP, Denver, Colorado, Scott L. Levin, Fisher, Sweetbaum & Levin, P.C., Denver, Colorado, Elise A. Yablonski, Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, New York, Daniel Rees Shulman, Gray Plaint, Mooty, Motty & Bennett, P.A., Minneapolis, Minnesota, Maxwell M. Blecher, John E. Andrews, Blecher & Collins, P.C., Los Angeles, California, with him on the briefs), for Defendant-Counterclaim-Plaintiff-Appellant., E. Glen Johnson, Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP, Fort Worth, Texas (Bart A. Rue, Frank P. Greenhaw IV, Kelly Hart & Hallman LLP, Fort Worth, Texas, Kenneth B. Siegel, Sherman & Howard, L.L.C., Denver, Colorado, with him on the brief), for Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Defendant-Appellee.