Appeals

An appeal can provide the path to vindication for litigants who have been deprived of a just result at trial, or the risk of reversal to those who have emerged victorious. Whatever the outcome in the court below, successful navigation of the appellate process requires a unique set of competencies and specialized knowledge. The keys to victory on appeal include crisp, persuasive writing; finely tuned analytical ability; and strong, confident speaking skills.

At Engelman Berger, we have the skill and experience to guide you through a successful appeal. Our attorneys have briefed and argued appeals in both state and federal appellate courts on a wide range of issues, including bankruptcies, creditors’ rights, contract disputes, water law, municipal law, constitutional law, business disputes, and real estate controversies. Our appellate lawyers work hand-in-hand with trial counsel, including attorneys from other firms, to provide the most effective presentation of the facts and legal arguments to the appellate court. We are admitted to, and have briefed and/or argued matters in, the following courts:

• United States Supreme Court

• Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

• Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

• Arizona Supreme Court

• Arizona Court of Appeals

• U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona

Our recent, representative experience includes the following:

• Compass Bank v. Bennett, 375 P.3d 950 (Ariz. App. 2016)
  Obtained appellate decision affirming judgment in favor of on non-purchase money home equity loan. The borrowers argued that Arizona precedent required the lender to affirmatively waive its deed of trust as a condition to filing suit on its promissory note. The appellate court rejected the borrowers’ argument, agreeing with the lender that Arizona law imposes no such requirement.

• Arizona Bank & Trust v. James R. Barrons Trust, 237 Ariz. 401, 402 (App. 2015)
  In a matter of first impression in Arizona, Engelman Berger obtained an opinion holding that a guarantor of a loan secured by residential property that qualifies for protection under the anti-deficiency statute may prospectively waive that statutory protection. The loans at issue were used to fund the acquisition, development, and construction of homes in a residential subdivision. The loans were personally guaranteed by the developer’s sophisticated principals. Engelman Berger represented the lender in trial court, and obtained a substantial deficiency judgment against the guarantors. The firm’s advocacy on appeal preserved the lender’s victory.

• Congrejo Investments v. Mann (In re Bender), 586 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 2009)
  Obtained dismissal of premature interlocutory appeal from an order of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel remanding to the bankruptcy court for additional fact finding. Following remand, our firm obtained a judgment in favor of the Chapter 7 trustee avoiding the debtor’s unauthorized post-petition transfer of a multi-million dollar parcel of property in Hawaii to a limited liability company controlled by himself and his family members, in a case affirming the principal of equitable tolling of the statute of limitations. The debtor petitioned for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court, which in a rare procedural move, requested a response brief from the trustee. Our firm prepared the response, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied cert, sealing the trustee’s victory.

• Maricopa-Stanfield Irr. & Drainage Dist. v. Robertson, 211 Ariz. 485 (2005)
  Represented the cities of Chandler, Glendale, Goodyear, Mesa, Peoria, and Scottsdale as amicus curiae in special action to Arizona Supreme Court. Successfully advocated for reversal of partial summary judgment in favor of landowners holding that they have vested rights to certain irrigation water from the Central Arizona Project.