Legal sense meets common sense.
At Champagne Law Firm, we focus on resolving business and commercial disputes as quickly and efficiently as possible. Our practice is entirely focused on litigation and trial of these cases. We do not draft contracts, practice transactional law or advice clients on starting, selling or buying a company. We are solely focused on resolving business and commercial disputes when the problems seem to be unsolveable.
Lawsuits and litigation are stressfull. Our goal is to give our clients the dedicated time and attention they need to feel confident and comfortable throughout the legal process. We believe in giving straightforward and reasoned advise and are committed to seeing it through.
We believe every case requires an effective strategy to achieve a successful resolution. In our practice, we believe in a combination of legal expertise and good, old-fashioned common sense to achieve the best results possible for our clients.
We represent clients in litigation and trial of claims brought on behalf of businesses and individuals in the following areas:
Settlement of $4,000,000 Partnership Dispute
After more than 20-years in business together, partners in a closely held corporation had come to loggerheads. The business was teetering on collapse as the 50/50 ownership split made it impossible for the partners to agree decisions about the future of the company. This threatened not only the investment the partners had in the business but also the 15-employees that depended upon them.
The clients had been represented by two previous lawyers that could not resolve the dispute in over 2-years. When we took over the case, we filed a multi-count lawsuit against the other partners and moved for immediate injunctive relief to obtain control of the business. After filing the lawsuit and with a hearing on the injunctive relief scheduled, the partners requested an immediate mediation. The 15-hour mediation resulted in a complete resolution of all the claims and a favorable resolution for our clients.
Trial on Securities Valuation of Officer's Stock in Corporation
A former officer of a closely-held national corporation with more than $5,000,000,000 in annual revenue sued to recover the securities she claimed she owned in the company. We were hired after the corporation fired their previous counsel following their loss of entitlement to the securities after a jury trial.
The plaintiff’s attorney claimed a valuation of plaintiff’s shares of more than $4M. After a trial on this claim, the court awarded the officer 20% of this value. Following the trial, both parties appealed and the case was settled for a confidential amount favorable to our clients.
$4,200,000 Verdict in Jury Trial for Breach of Contract & Fraud Trial
Our client was a real estate developer of a multi-million dollar mixed use development. His partner had agreed to sell his interest in the development to the client. Instead, the partner conspired to undermine the development and fraudulently wrest control of the development for himself. The partner counterclaimed for breach of contract and fraud as well.
The case was tried to a jury over 2-weeks. The parties called more than 20-witnesses including accountants, bankers and experts on valuation of the client's interest in the development. The jury ultimately returned a $4.2M verdict in favor of our client.
Settlement of Breach of Asset Purchase Agreement for 95% of Price Paid
Our client purchased a professional practice from the seller that had operated it for decades. When she took over the practice, she discovered several irregularities including previously undisclosed liens, overstated valuation of equipment, and fraudulent accounting practices.
The client had been previously represented by two other law firms that were unable to resolve the matter over 2-years. We filed a lawsuit against the seller, the broker and other associated entities. After 6-months of litigation, the parties reached a confidential settlement resulting in the client receiving 95% of her purchase price back from the seller in cash.
Defense of Americans with Disabilities Lawsuit Against Municipality
The plaintiffs sued a municipality in federal court for denial of their request for a zoning variance to operate an alcohol and drug facility in a residential neighborhood. The plaintiffs sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act after the City Council denied the request.
The plaintiff demanded more than $8M in damages plus attorney’s fees. On the eve of trial, the judge granted our motion to strike plaintiff’s expert from testifying based on Daubert v. Merrell Dow leaving the plaintiff with no expert to testify on damages. The case ultimately two-weeks before trial for $250,000.
Arbitration Award for Client in Non-Compete Dispute
Our client was a national corporation that was attempting to enforce a non-compete provision in a contract. The opposing party argued the non-compete was unenforceable and countersued against our client for breach of contract and fraud.
We successfully argued at the arbitration that the non-compete provision was a valid and enforceable restraint of trade and that the company was therefore restricted from competing with our client. The opposing party's claims were dismissed.
Summary Judgment for Client in 1st Amendment Case
The plaintiff sued our client, a municipality, for violation of his rights under the 1st Amendment. The municipality had refused a variance to allow the plaintiff to open a tattoo parlor in its downtown core. Recent decisions across the country had repeatedly ruled that the act of tattooing is protected expression under the 1st Amendment.
We filed a comprehensive Motion for Summary Judgment arguing that the municipality allowed for tattoo parlors in most other areas other than the downtown core. We established that the zoning prohibition was a reasonable time, place and manner restriction enacted to further a compelling government interest of maintaining a vibrant downtown core. The federal district court, in a 46-page Order, granted our Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissed the plaintiff's claims.
I hired Martin for a litigation matter and he was excellent: organized, thorough, professional and explained everything completely.
He has represented us on several occasions and always helped us resolve our legal issues in a professional and positive way.
Words can not express how grateful and happy I am, that Marty worked on my case and got the best result possible. He is honest, straightforward and an expert in his field. I came hopelessly from another firm that charged me for almost two years with no result. Marty solved my case in 6 month with 1/3 the cost of what other firms charged me. I highly recommend him and assure you that you will be in good hands.
My wife was being sued by an insurance company after an accidental fire in a rented home. He analyzed the situation and developed an innovative solution that took us out of the claim entirely. Amazing. Then he topped off the whole thing with a generous gift to us that we will always remember. I don’t think we could be bigger fans. God bless you, Marty!
Fair, honest, and knows what he’s doing. If you need legal support, you’d be lucky to have Marty on your team. Fantastic human and skilled attorney.