Appeals are challenging.  They can present traps for attorneys unfamiliar with the appellate process.  And not all good trial lawyers are effective appellate advocates.  That's where GTH's Appellate Advocacy Group comes in.  High level appellate advocacy requires special skills, expertise and experience.  Our appellate attorneys possess those qualities.  When appellate success is critical, parties and their trial counsel turn to Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell.

Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell has assembled a group of dedicated, talented appellate advocates.  Over a quarter of the firm's attorneys clerked for state or federal court judges.  We have handled numerous appeals in Washington's Courts of Appeals and Supreme Court, the Ninth Circuit and other federal district courts, and the United States Supreme Court.  Our appellate attorneys are recognized for their exceptional brief writing, insightful analysis, and persuasive oral advocacy.

We provide four categories of services:

1. Assuming full responsibility for all aspects of an appeal, including drafting briefs, oral argument and preparing or responding to petitions for review.
2. Appellate consulting services, including brief editing and oral argument preparation.
3. Consulting at the trial court level to ensure that the case is properly prepared and postured for appeal.
4. Writing amicus briefs for clients or organizations.

Gordon, Thomas, Honeywell's appellate specialists handle all types of civil appeals.  Our areas of expertise include:

• Commercial
• Personal Injury/Wrongful Death
• Real Estate/Land Use
• Tort/Negligence
• Insurance Coverage
• Construction Defect
• Complex Litigation
• Environmental
• Public Utilities
• Employment
• Antitrust
• Condemnation

The following are a few of our significant appellate cases:

• Costco v. Hoen, 514 F.3d 915 (2008) - Represented the Washington Beer & Wine Wholesalers Association in successfully defeating an effort by Costco to dismantle Washington's system for regulating beer/wine distribution and sale.  Costco argued that Washington laws were pre-empted by federal antitrust law, but the 9th Circuit agreed with us that, with one relatively minor exception, Washington's regulatory system was valid.
  
  
• Kruger Clinic of Orthopedics v. Regence BlueShield, 157 Wn.2d 290 (2006) - Successfully argued that an arbitration clause effectively prohibiting 20,000 health care professionals in Washington from bringing a class action against Regence BlueShield for improper coding practices was void and unenforceable as violative of Washington insurance regulations.
  
  
• Mayer v. Sto Industries, 156 Wn.2d 677 (2006) - Represented a homeowner in a case involving defective EIFS siding, and upheld in both the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court a jury verdict awarding extensive damages.  In addition, in the Supreme Court we obtained a reversal of the Court of Appeals and a reinstatement of the trial court's order of extensive monetary sanctions against the defendant for discovery abuse.
  
  
• McIntyre v. Washington State Patrol, 135 Wn. App. 594 (2006) - Represented a Washington State Patrol officer in a wrongful termination lawsuit, and successfully argued that she was entitled to recover her full attorney fees at trial and on appeal under Washington statute.
  
  
• State v. Paul Bunyan, 132 Wn. App. 85 (2006) - Affirmed a $2.6 million award in a condemnation action where the Washington Department of Transportation condemned two "strips" of property along a major intersection.  We obtained judicial recognition that the "before and after" appraisal method was not the sole and mandatory method for establishing just compensation in partial condemnations.
  
  
• Skokomish Tribe v. City of Tacoma, 410 F.3d 506 (9th Cir. 2005) - Successfully defended the City of Tacoma against a $6 billion claim by the Skokomish Indian Tribe for alleged damages to fish and wildlife arising out of the construction of the Cushman Hydroelectric Project in the 1920s.  After the trial court granted summary judgment, the City prevailed before a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit and in an en banc (11 judge) hearing, and convinced the U.S. Supreme Court to deny the Tribe's petition for a writ of certiorari.
  
  
• Maleng v. King County Corrections Guild, 150 Wn.2d 325 (2003) - At issue was the constitutionality and charter compliance of a voter initiative to reduce the size of the King County Council.  We successfully sought direct emergency review of an adverse trial court decision, which the Supreme Court unanimously reversed.
  
  
• Puget Sound Energy v. Alba General Ins. Co., 149 Wn.2d 135 (2003) - Successfully represented an insurance company issuing a first-party property insurance policy in the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, because the policyholder could not demonstrate that costs likely to be incurred exceeded its prior insurance and contribution recoveries.
  
  
• Guillen v. Pierce County, 537 U.S. 129 (2003); 144 Wn.2d 696 (2001) - Prevailed in the Washington Court of Appeals, and Washington Supreme Court and partially prevailed in the U.S. Supreme Court in a wrongful death action.  The specific issue on appeal was whether the plaintiff could obtain copies of information compiled by the county regarding a particular intersection's accident history and related information.
  
  
• City of Burien v. Growth Management Hearings Board, 113 Wn. App. 375 (2002) - Successfully represented the City of Burien in the SeaTac Airport "third runway expansion" litigation, prevailing in a State of Washington Growth Management Hearings Board proceedings and appeals to the superior court and the Court of Appeals.
  
  
• City of University Place v. McGuire, 144 Wn.2d 640 (2001) - In a land use action, successfully established a developer's ability to mine a parcel of property as an extension of a larger non-conforming use.  This case found that the doctrine of diminishing asset was the law of Washington.
  
  
• Broad v. Mannesmann Anlagenbau, 141 Wn.2d 670 (2000) - Prevailed in part in the Supreme Court on a certified question from the Ninth Circuit involving service of process on a foreign corporation under The Hague Convention where the plaintiff failed to serve pleadings translated into German within the 90-day service period of RCW 4.16.170.
  
  
• American National Ins. Co. v. B & L Trucking, 134 Wn.2d 413 (1998) - In an environmental insurance coverage case, prevailed in both the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court and established that a policyholder was entitled to full payment for all insurance companies providing coverage over a period of continuing damage, and that no portion of the damages could be "allocated" to the policyholder.