Client Collaborations
All Representative Cases
Represented defendant in appeal of $1 million judgment based on jury verdict. Court of Appeals reversed judgment and remanded for new trial. Cyberco Holdings, Inc. v. Con-Way Transp. Services, 212 Or App 576, rev denied, 343 Or 366 (2007)
Coauthored amicus brief in Washburn v. Columbia Forest Products concerning intersection of Oregon Medical Marijuana Act and federal law pertaining to controlled substances. Washburn v. Columbia Forest Products (2006)
Successfully defended broker-dealer in arbitration, federal district court, and Ninth Circuit in action arising from options trading. Nordahl Development Corp. v. Salomon Smith Barney, 309 F Supp 2d 1257 (D Or 2004)
Obtained reversal on appeal of $1 million jury verdict on counterclaim for breach of contract. Atlas Copco v. Karn, 172 Or App 317, rev denied, 332 Or 316 (2001)
Represented Louisiana-Pacific (respondent) on appeal from defense verdict in claim by State of Oregon for restitution of costs of suppressing forest fire. Louisiana Pacific v. State, 166 Or App 205 (2000)
Represented Springfield School District (appellant) in appeal from judgment for defendant in public records act case. Springfield School District v. Guard Publishing, 156 Or App 176 (1998)
Iván has handled high-stakes appeals in a wide range of subject areas, including commercial disputes, CERCLA issues, constitutional law issues, criminal justice issues, education law issues, ERISA disputes, insurance coverage, tort claims, and securities claims. His experience includes appellate motions and petitions, merits and amicus briefing, and oral argument (before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the Oregon Court of Appeals), petitions for writs of mandamus and petitions for review and responses to the Oregon Supreme Court, as well as amicus briefs in the Oregon Appellate Courts and U.S. Supreme Court. Including the following matters:
Successfully defended school district on appeal regarding claims under the Oregon Tort Claims Act brought by current employees.
Successfully defended university on appeal regarding claims for violations of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, including a “Section 1983” claim, and the Anti-Terrorism Act.