The lawyers at Starrs Mihm & Caschette LLP are among the most experienced in the Rocky Mountain region at handling complex attorney professional liability cases. Our lawyers collectively have tried more legal malpractice cases to verdict than any other law firm in Colorado. We represent both plaintiffs and defendants in legal malpractice cases in Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico, and other states. The following is a sample of the lawyers' professional liability cases handled by our lawyers:

Conflict of Interest - Failure to Prepare Personal Injury Case (for the Plaintiff).U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. Michael Mihm represented a woman who suffered bilateral knee injuries in an automobile accident, including a torn meniscus. The accident left her with chronic pain and reduced earning capacity. She hired a law firm to file a personal injury action against the other driver. Her lawyers failed to timely endorse an expert witness and failed to properly prepare the case. After her lead lawyer was appointed a Colorado district judge, her case was dismissed. We sued the law firm and the judge. We subsequently discovered that the defendant lawyers failed to disclose a significant conflict of interest. We settled the case for $185,000 through an Offer of Judgment.

Personal Injury - Missed Statute of Limitations (for the Plaintiff).District Court, City and County of Denver, Colorado. Rich Caschette represented a woman seriously injured with the stair railing at her condominium complex gave way, causing her to fall. Her first lawyer allowed the statute of limitations to expire. We settled the professional negligence claim against the defendant lawyer for a substantial but confidential amount prior to trial.

Securities Fraud (for the Plaintiffs).District Court, City and County of Denver, Colorado. Michael Mihm represented the SEC receiver of an electric power company engaged in selling unregistered securities. We prosecuted a legal malpractice/securities fraud lawsuit against the lawyers and law firms who authored legal opinions stating that partnership interests were not securities and were not required to be registered, when the partnership interests clearly were securities. The power company sold millions of dollars of the unregistered securities to unsuspecting investors. We settled with most of the defendants for a substantial amount before trial. After a 15-day jury trial against the remaining defendant lawyer, the jury found there was no proximate cause between the lawyer's actions and the investors' losses, and found in favor of the remaining defendant.

Aiding and Abetting a Breach of Fiduciary Duty - Oppression of Minority Shareholders (for the Defense).District Court, City and County of Denver, Colorado. Michael Mihm and Elizabeth Hyatt represented one of Colorado's leading business law firms in a lawsuit filed by a minority member of technology company who alleged that he was squeezed out of his ownership interest in the company, and alleging that the defendant law firm aided and abetted the majority owners' breach of their fiduciary duties. The jury found in favor of our client after a 9-day jury trial.

Elder Abuse and Fraud (for the Plaintiff).United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Michael Mihm and Elizabeth Hyatt represented a personal representative of a Colorado estate seeking to recover millions of dollars misappropriated from an elderly woman by her son and daughter-in-law with the alleged assistance of a Rhode Island lawyer and others. We settled with one of the law firm defendants on the first day of trial. The trial court granted summary judgment against in favor of the remaining defendants. The summary judgment was later upheld by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in an unpublished decision.

Breach of Fiduciary Duty (for the Defense).District Court, County of Pitkin, Colorado. Michael Mihm represented a prominent Colorado real estate law firm in a three-week jury trial in which the plaintiff, an Aspen real estate developer and art dealer alleged that the firm breached a fiduciary duty. The jury returned an inconsistent verdict, finding no proximate cause, but awarded modest damages against our client law firm. The Colorado Court of Appeals partially reversed the verdict.

Real Estate and Land Use (for the Defense).District Court, County of Pitkin County, Colorado. Michael Mihm represented a prominent real estate law firm in a two-week jury trial in which the plaintiffs, a wealthy Hollywood producer and his wife, claimed the defendant law firm failed to inform them that their multi-million dollar home was in an avalanche zone. After a two-week trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of our client law firm.

Illegal Tax Shelters (for the Defense).District Court, City and County of Denver, Colorado. Michael Mihm defended a Denver tax lawyer and his law firm in case in which more than 180 investors in tax-shelter partnerships alleged that the defendant lawyer had negligently authored a tax opinion that resulted in an IRS audit, causing the business to fail. The plaintiffs sought $14 million. After a 3-week trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of our clients.

Malicious Prosecution - Government Contracts (for the Defense).District Court, County of Adams, Colorado. Michael Mihm represented a Colorado Chief Deputy Attorney General and Assistant Attorney General in a two-week bench trial of a malicious prosecution case brought by the defendants in a white-collar criminal action accused of misappropriating federal job-training funds. The court found in favor of our client.

Multiple Claims - Conveyance of Interest in Real Property (for the Defense).United States District Court, District of Colorado. Elizabeth Starrs and Ross Pulkrabek represented individual lawyers and their law firm accused of rendering negligent advice, breaching their fiduciary duties, and aiding and abetting the breach of fiduciary duties by another after they prepared a quit-claim deed conveying all of the plaintiff's interest in investment property to her ex-husband. The case involved significant questions of international law and discovery of foreign documents. The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant attorneys.