Appellate Advocacy

When a case enters the post-trial and appellate stages, significant changes occur that may cause a client to consider employing a new attorney to handle an appeal. Representation at the next level with an attorney who understands and is experienced at appellate litigation can be vital to the outcome of a case.

Jim Lobsenz is highly recognized as an exceptional appellate lawyer in the Pacific Northwest. For 35 years he has represented clients on appeal, including cases on civil rights, police misconduct, wrongful sentencing, sexual misconduct, employment discrimination, sexual harassment, education, housing, and more. 

Civil Procedure/Discovery

  • Ground Zero v. United States Navy, 860 F.3d 1244 (9th Cir. 2017)
  • Foss Maritime Co. v. Brandewiede, 190 Wn. App. 186, 359 P.3d 905 (Div. I, Sept. 14, 2015) (appellant). Reversed trial court’s order disqualifying defendant’s trial counsel on the eve of trial for alleged misconduct in review of documents provided by employer’s ex-employee containing allegedly privileged communications, after employer granted direct contact of ex-employee to counsel.  Obtained emergency stay of disqualification order and discretionary review to get case before the appellate court.
  • Bunch v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co., 180 Wn. App. 37, 321 P.3d 266 (2014) (Priority of Action rule)
  • Barabin v. AstenJohnson, 730 F.3d 457 (9th Cir. 2014) (en banc) (Daubert expert witness requirements)
  • Tatham v. Rogers, 170 Wn.App. 76, 283 P.3d 583 (Div. III., 2012) (appellant). Reversed refusal to vacate property division in underlying committed intimate relationship for trial judge’s failure to disclose material information on the relationship between  the woman’s counsel and the trial judge, and where the lopsided property division called into question its fairness given the circumstances and the law as to such divisions, non-disclosure was not harmless.
  • Foxworth ex. Re. Darden v. Kia Motors Corp., 2005 WL 2888216 (11th Cir. 2005) Successfully defended the summary judgment dismissal, on grounds of forum non conveniens and statute of limitations, of a double wrongful death action brought against client Kia Motors.
  • Magana v. Hyundai Motor America, 123 Wn. App. 306, 94 P.3d 987 (2004) Won a retrial for clients Hyundai Motor America and Hyundai Motor Corporation in a crashworthiness case involving paraplegic injury, by establishing prejudicial error caused by the failure to instruct a jury about the exclusion of wrongfully admitted alternative design evidence.
  • King v. Olympic Pipe Line Co., 104 Wn. App. 338, 16 P.3d 45 (2000) Corporate officer named as defendant in civil suit for wrongful death related to pipe line explosion could seek a stay of civil discovery, thereby avoiding potential self-incrimination, pending determination of whether there would be a criminal prosecution.
  • Washington State Physicians Exchange v. Fisons, 122 Wn.2d 299, 858 P.2d 1054 (1993) Won ruling that trial court must impose monetary sanctions against a litigant who engaged in deliberate discovery abuse and litigation fraud.

Constitutional Law

  • Witt v. Department of the Air Force, 527 F.3d 806 (9th Cir. 2008) Congressional policy excluding known homosexuals from the armed forces is subject to intermediate scrutiny, therefore an outed lesbian officer cannot be discharged without a finding that her presence has a bad effect on the morale and discipline of her assigned military unit.
  • Hargis v. Foster, 312 F.3d 404 (9th Cir., 2002) Reversed dismissal of Idaho prisoner’s First Amendment claim and remanded to determine whether discipline of prisoner speech violated the constitution.
  • Levinson v. Washington Horse Racing Commission, 48 Wn.App. 822, 740 P.2d 898 (1987) Revoking wife’s horse racing license because her husband had a prior felony conviction violated wife’s constitutional right to freedom of marriage.
  • Seattle v. Braggs, 41 Wn.App. 646, 705 P.2d 303 (1985) Reversed dismissal of an appeal due to the trial court’s failure to properly advise the appellant of the timeliness requirements for filing appeals.
  • Seattle v. Camby, 104 Wn.2d 49, 701 P.2d 499 (1985) Case of first impression in Washington regarding the test to be employed in matters involving “fighting words.” Appellant’s conviction under municipal harassment ordinance unanimously reversed by the Washington Supreme Court, which dismissed the charge.

Criminal Law

  • In re Restraint of Bufilini, 4 Wn. App.2d 392 (2018)
  • State v. Lau, 174 Wn. App. 857 (2013)
  • State v. King & Israel, 113 Wn.App. 243, 54 P.3d 1218 (2002), rev. den., 149 Wn.2d 1015 (2003) Reversed four convictions for instructional error on conspiracy charges, which permitted finding of guilt for accomplice liability based on reasonable forseeability of acts rather than knowledge of the specific substantive crimes charged.
  • State v. Stein, 144 Wn.2d 236, 27 P.3d 184 (2001) Murder convictions reversed because trial court erred in instructing jurors regarding the vicarious liability of a co-conspirator for the acts of other conspirators.
  • State v. Letourneau, 100 Wn. App. 424, 997 P.2d 436 (2000) Sentencing judge exceeded her authority when she forbade convicted defendant from profiting by selling her story to news magazine.
  • State v. Stegall, 124 Wn.2d 719, 881 P.2d 979 (1994) Conviction reversed because defendant did not waive his state constitutional right to a jury of twelve.
  • In Re Young, 122 Wn.2d 1, 857 P.2d (1993) (amicus) Argued against Washington’s new involuntary, lifetime civil commitment law for sexual predators.
  • Seattle v. Mesiani, 110 Wn.2d 454, 755 P.2d 775 (1988) Washington Supreme Court held, without dissent, that roadblocks set up by law enforcement agencies to identify motorists driving under the influence of alcohol are unconstitutional under state law due to the absence of particularized suspicion.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: