Litigation / Trial Law



“I just got sued. What do I do?”

Imagine your business has just been sued or needs to file a lawsuit in Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota or North Dakota. You’re probably thinking, “What do I do?” “How do I find the right trial attorney?” “How can this case be resolved quickly and in my favor?” Our trial lawyers have the grit your case needs. We listen to our clients and help them navigate complex issues to achieve their goals. Our team takes care of your lawsuit so you can keep running your business and focus on what’s worth it in your life rather than spending time stressing about a lawsuit.



Our Sioux City, Sioux Falls, and Omaha attorney teams provide experienced trial, litigation, arbitration and mediation services in Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota.

The Goosmann Law Firm can work with you to resolve complex business disputes that include bet-the-company and precedent-setting cases. While we’re never afraid to take a case to trial, we never lose sight of a client’s business goals.

Goosmann Law’s clients included businesses of all sizes, from startups to Fortune 500 companies, business professionals, commercial banks, manufacturers, professionals, investors, insurance companies and non-profit organizations. Goosmann Law assists clients during the early stages of a dispute by presenting early, proactive case assessments and a clear picture of the client’s rights and obligations as well as the overall strengths and weaknesses of the client’s position. Our attorneys outline various options for resolving disputes, including mediation, arbitration, and other forms of dispute resolution. Through analyzing multiple strategies, Goosmann Law handles matters efficiently, while bringing a fresh perspective to each case. The firm operates in a highly competitive environment and brings new value to your business.  Goosmann litigators understand what clients expect from them. Clients want law firms to be responsive, address problems before they occur, and provide value.

Goosmann lawyers get to know their clients’ goals, provide clear case strategies, establish and maintain litigation budgets, and effectively resolve disputes.  Sometimes a win is making a dispute go away quickly and confidentially to protect a company from a public relations perspective.  Other times, it is important to preserve executive time and resolve a dispute before the client has to spend its precious time on a lawsuit. At the same time, some cases go the distance and result in a large monetary award after a trial or arbitration. Knowing our clients and their goals is what drives us. We are strategic players, not just players.

Trial lawyers are a special breed who think quickly on their feet. They can break down a situation and a person in real time. Goosmann Law’s attorneys have the experience and reputation for fitting this mold. When a dispute involves voluminous documents, dozens of depositions, and high stakes—you want Goosmann Law on your side. Let Goosmann Law navigate you through the most complex commercial litigation. Just look at our RESULTS!

With experience in more than 600 trials in state and federal courts, we handle large, complex, and high-profile business disputes.
"Goosmann Law Firm helped us receive a favorable ruling on a motion for summary judgement. As a Risk Manager and working with local counsel on our legal matters, I know how uncommon these judgements are. The case was complex with lots of twists and turns, and the Goosmann team navigated us through the entire process seamlessly. Their technical experience and skill showed throughout the case and was evident in our favorable result. They made sure we were informed of each step of our case, dates, and deadlines. I greatly appreciated their willingness to be flexible and always being available to jump on a call with myself, our general counsel, or claims examiners to discuss strategy. I highly recommend Goosmann Law Firm and their outstanding team. They know what they’re doing, I thoroughly enjoy working with them, and they deliver."

Nick Alvarez

Risk Manager, Risk Management Department, Petco Animal Supplies, Inc.
"These guys rock. The Goosmann Law Firm team is a good return on your legal investment. The Firm has been a valuable source for strategic legal advice for both me and my business. I feel confident and assured as a CEO and business owner knowing that the Goosmann team is on my side. When I have a question, Goosmann takes the time to explain the delicate web of complex laws to me in plain English. They guide me to make the best business decisions by factoring in not only the law but the political and industry landscape. The firm zealously represents me whether we are in my local city hall getting a permit or in a federal court battling with global corporations. Every CEO has a secret element to help them be successful, Goosmann Law Firm is mine."

Josh Nelson

CEO Great Lakes Communication Corp.
"I have worked with Goosmann Law for several years and have leaned on Jeana and her firm for advice and guidance with a broad range of cases. The experience and knowledge they provide gives me a sense of peace and confidence that a true professional is protecting our interests. I’ve attended legal proceedings with Jeana and admire her skills, professionalism and the respect she has earned with fellow colleagues. Jeana Goosmann is truly a business partner. Her thoroughness, dedication to her clients, and command of the law are a perfect complement to her availability and genuine concern for her client."

Tim Rossetti

Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Chief Administrative Officer, Sabre Industries

Disclaimer: The following testimonials do not constitute a guarantee, warranty, or prediction regarding the outcome of your legal matter.




Goosmann Law has 2 AAA Arbitrators on our team

We help you and your team win disputes through Alternative Dispute Resolution such as mediation and arbitration. Our firm has 2 AAA Arbitrators, Jeana Goosmann and Joel Carney, here to assist your case! No need to search for an arbitrator as we have two right under our own roof!

Two Goosmann Law employees standing next to the American Arbitration Association offices


We have over 600 Trials in State and Federal Courts!

We are experienced trial lawyers with a passion for business and grit in the courtroom. We are ready to help you win disputes, achieve your company’s goals, and spend time on what’s worth it.

Conference Room


We have over 50 team members!

When you hire Goosmann you get a full team behind you to help support your goals and the success of your matter. We hire top talent to ensure our team is strong as we collaborate with each other using our strengths to your advantage.

Sioux Falls location

What we do.


"What are the stages of a case and how long can they take?"

Lawsuits can be time-consuming, whether you are the one suing or the one being sued. Generally, the more issues sorted out before trial, the shorter the trial proceedings will be - and we understand time is money. A case may go through a number of stages before reaching a resolution, depending on the needs of the parties involved. Let us help you save time and money on your lawsuit - call our Sioux City, Sioux Falls or Omaha office today!

"We are in a dispute and our C-Level executives cannot agree on how we should resolve the matter. What should we do?"

You should engage Goosmann Law when the dispute begins, before a lawsuit is filed. Get the protection you need. Internal emails you create regarding the dispute may later be discoverable. Letters or emails you send to the other side may come back to bite you. Goosmann lawyers know how to minimize risk, create a strategy to accomplish your goals, and protect you from the unknown. It’s crucial to preserve all evidence and not create bad evidence in the event the matter is not resolved, escalates, and ends up in a trial. An early fact investigation may also reveal claims and monetary damages you did not know you had rights to under the law. Know your rights by working with Goosmann Law early in the process.

How do you decide when and where to sue and for what?

Goosmann lawyers put a lot of experience and analysis to work to determine the most beneficial venue and jurisdiction for your dispute. The jury verdict history, historical rulings by judges in similar cases, and the convenience of the forum are just some of the issues Goosmann Law evaluates. If we determine your case is best filed outside of our licensed states, we will locate strong local counsel to work with us to pursue your claims. Goosmann Law regularly appears in state and federal courts throughout the United States with the assistance of local counsel, with whom we have developed strong relationships.

Before filing suit in state or federal court, if there are administrative agencies involved we will exhaust your administrative remedies promptly so we can get your lawsuit on file. The timing of your lawsuit is also a strategic decision. Sometimes you want to file suit first and address settlement options later, but sometimes you want to put forth every effort to resolve the matter before a public lawsuit.  The law may also dictate when you must file your claims with a statute of limitations or a statute of repose. Goosmann Law navigates your business through all of these issues.

What are your claims and what should you sue for?

Before filing a lawsuit, Goosmann Law evaluates the facts and analyzes a broad spectrum of potential causes of action. We utilize our experience and litigation know-how to craft a Complaint that puts your business in the strongest position possible to achieve your goals. Before filing suit, we analyze various issues, such as whether you should ask for a jury trial or a bench (non-jury) trial; whether you can seek and recover punitive damages; whether you should seek a temporary or permanent injunction; and what type of damages are recoverable. Moreover, we anticipate the counterclaims and defenses that the other side will likely assert. We cut through the legal clutter and use our skills to your advantage.

How are cases resolved?

While we relish the fact that we can stand before a jury and tell your story, we realize that most cases are resolved at the bargaining table. The difference between winning and losing often comes down to our ability to negotiate an agreement on terms that benefit our clients.  Our willingness to take a case all the way through a jury trial can often help our clients obtain beneficial settlements. We use our aggressive negotiation skills to obtain favorable settlements.  We play long ball, short ball, soft ball and hard ball to achieve your goals.

How do you handle discovery?

In discovery, both sides are exchanging documents, taking depositions, answering interrogatories, and responding to requests for admissions and requests for production of documents. We craft a strategic discovery plan with the budget in mind, using technology and our client’s resources to keep the process in check. In larger cases involving voluminous documents, we utilize the e-discovery process to identify key documents to be used in depositions, motions and trial.

Beyond traditional discovery that you will find in state and federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Goosmann Law also prides itself in the use of informal discovery tactics. We call witnesses, interview people that may have information, locate former employees, contact neighbors, scope out the field, stop the garbage truck and collect evidence – we get dirty and we like it. Many cases are won with the facts uncovered through our own investigation, not the documents opposing counsel passes across the table.

How do you decide what motions to file?

There are endless motions that can be filed in a lawsuit. Goosmann Law files motions which are necessary to advance our strategy and help our clients achieve their goals.  Before we file a motion, we evaluate its likelihood of success, the cost and expense, and the risks.  Then we discuss our analysis and make a clear recommendation to our clients. Whether we file a Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Stay, Motion to Continue, or Motion for Summary Judgment, we recognize the impact those motions can have in the case and make sure you do as well. Early on in a lawsuit, we anticipate motions we will file as part of our strategy and build support for them before they are drafted or filed. Before we take depositions and ask for documents in discovery, we anticipate the motions we will need to file and have read the jury instructions so we know what we need to prove our case. We also establish our trial themes early so that we can build momentum, apply pressure, and be your zealous and tenacious lawyers in the courtroom.

I’m getting deposed, how do I know what to do to prepare?

Goosmann Law’s clients are prepared when its deposition time, plain and simple. Our clients know what to expect long before the court reporter swears you in and before the video camera starts rolling. We provide documents to review, explain the process, run you through mock questioning—anything to get you as prepared as possible. We protect you in the deposition and object to improper questions from opposing counsel. We protect our attorney client privilege and enforce the Rules of Civil Procedure. We will be by your side. We make sure you give the best testimony possible.

When we take depositions, we are equally prepared. We know your goals, whether we are deposing a fact witness or company representative. We know how to handle witnesses that “can’t remember the facts” or are combative, hostile or evasive. We also know how to handle opposing counsel. We take WOW depositions – depositions that win Motions for Summary Judgment and impeach witnesses at trial on large screens right behind them on the witness stand.

What experts do you hire?

In many cases, the selection of an expert witness is crucial. Goosmann Law has developed strong relationships with experts in countless fields so we can find the expert that fits your case. We engage those experts early on in disputes, and have them assist in our case strategy to help us win. We select experts that calculate damages, opine on liability issues, explain difficult concepts to judges and juries in plain English, and help us attack the opinions of our opponents’ experts.

How are social media, texts, voicemails, video and other electronically-stored information used in lawsuits?

When retrieving document requests that involve electronically-stored information (“ESI”), it’s important to preserve authenticity and admissibility at trial. Our attorneys are skilled in ensuring that ESI documentation is properly handled in court. ESI can include data from a range of different areas, such as social media, shared hard drives and smartphones.  Our litigation lawyers are very familiar with the process of electronic discovery and will help you to produce the necessary ESI information at trial.

Are jury consultants real? What are jury consultants and what is their role during trial?

If you have ever seen the new CBS series Bull, you’ve probably asked yourself if jury consultants are in fact real. Don’t worry, you won’t find any spoilers about the show here, but you should know that the drama inspired by Dr. Phil McGraw’s early career is in fact very real. A jury consultant is an expert in human behavior and can help attorneys select jurors. They play a huge role in the pretrial process, as they gather information about jurors and assist in the juror selection process.

During the trial, a jury consultant works with the attorney to shape juror perceptions of the case in order to help achieve a favorable outcome. This can include judging a juror’s behavior and body language and helping the witness with their presentation of facts.

What types of evidence are used during a case?

Generally, there are four types of evidence: real evidence, demonstrative, documentary and testimony. In relation to the case, real evidence, documentary evidence and testimony may be considered substantive. Real evidence refers to anything tangible, demonstrative is a model of what likely happened, documentary is anything considered written and testimonial is provided by a witness at trial. All types of evidence must be obtained legally in order to be admissible in court.

What does attorney-work product mean?

Attorney-work product refers to attorney notes, reports about client and witness conversations, attorney strategy memos, and legal research. These materials and information are prepared in anticipation of litigation and are privileged, meaning your opponent typically cannot obtain the materials and information.

What does attorney-client privilege mean?

The attorney-client privilege protects the communications between attorneys and their clients. In other words, if you are in a lawsuit or are communicating with an attorney in anticipation of a lawsuit, your opponent cannot “discover” or obtain the contents of the communications you (or your officers or employees) had with the attorney. Those communications are confidential and will be kept secret.

What is a tort?

Not to be confused with a delicious dessert, a tort refers to a wrongful act. The party that commits a tort is considered the tortfeaser (or defendant), and can be held liable if they had a duty to behave in a certain way, failed to conform to that duty, and caused injury or loss as a result. Torts can be intentional (e.g., assault or defamation) or negligent (e.g., a car accident). In addition, there are strict liability torts (e.g., product liability lawsuits) which do not require intentional or negligent acts.

How are class action lawsuits different from other lawsuits?

A class action lawsuit is a real life example of the concept that there is “strength in numbers.” A class action lawsuit differs from a normal lawsuit because more plaintiffs (the people who file the lawsuit) are involved in the process. In a class action lawsuit, a group of people with similar claims (some of whom can be unknown at the time the lawsuit is filed) take action against a defendant. In a class action lawsuit, the group must name a “lead plaintiff” to represent all of the plaintiffs’ interests. When the lawsuit is resolved, the outcome applies to all of the plaintiffs.

What happens in trial when somebody objects?

An objection is raised in court by an attorney regarding a specific question or evidence that is produced at trial. Generally, objections need to be made on specific grounds and are used by attorneys when they want something to be disallowed from the trial altogether. This may be something that is considered misleading, argumentative, speculation or had already been answered previously in the trial. A judge can rule one of two ways when an objection is stated, he or she can either overrule the objection or sustain it. When an objection is overruled, the evidence is accepted and is then admitted into court. If an objection is sustained, the lawyer must address the issue of the objection to ensure that the jury only hears evidence that has been properly admitted.

What are opening statements?

An opening statement is similar to how it sounds – it begins the trial and is each party’s opportunity to set the scene for the jury. An opening statement however, is limited to outlining facts that will introduce the dispute at hand. The key information to remember when writing an opening statement is that it should not propose an argument, but instead should provide insight into what will be said on the stand for that particular party. Many jurors make their decisions after opening statements and then use the evidence to support their conclusion, and we at Goosmann put extreme care and effort into crafting effective opening statements to ensure the jury understands the merits of our client’s position.

What is a closing argument?

A closing argument is provided after all factual evidence in the case is provided and is used as a tool to persuade the jury about evidence significance. Closing arguments pose an opportunity for both parties to remind jurors of the evidence provided and how it pertains to their side of the case. This may include commenting on credible witnesses and providing reasons as to why jurors should decide in their favor.

Who will be the witnesses in my case?

A trial court cannot function without the participation of witnesses. A witness is an individual who has information regarding a specific case and provides this evidence to the court. Those who witnessed an influential part of the case regarding the dispute are often times required to testify during these court proceedings by way of a subpoena. Witnesses should be chosen on the basis of their involvement with the case and how their testimony may affect its outcome.

What is ESI (Electronically Stored Information)?

Electronically stored information (“ESI”) is data in digital form that can be altered and stored.  In 2006, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were revised such that the parties to a lawsuit may legally request electronically stored information stored in any medium or format. ESI refers to any and all information that can be stored in computers, storage devices or phones, and may include voicemails, photographs, text messages, and recordings. It can also include social media information as discussed above.

How do you pick a jury?

A jury should be made up of individuals who are free from bias or prejudice. An attorney selects a jury that will reflect the plaintiff and will ultimately understand specific facts of the case at hand. Potentially with the help of a jury consultant, a jury is selected through questioning and keen observation. Behavior, demographics and life experience are looked at closely to predict a juror’s stance on a particular topic and can improve the outcome of the case by up to 15 percent

How do you keep your client informed on their case?

Communication is key to an effective attorney-client relationship. Lawyers must keep their clients informed about any and all changes in their case and must get the clients’ consent before taking certain actions on the clients’ behalf. The job of a lawyer is to give advice about a legal issue, but he/she must also keep the client informed and involved in important decisions. Goosmann Law does not keep clients in the dark. We have a 24-hour policy/expectation when it comes to responding to client telephone calls and text messages. We understand the pace of business.  We know some things require immediate attention.

What is Mediation? What is Arbitration?

Mediation is an informal process used to settle cases before trial. When the parties agree to mediate, they agree to hire a “mediator,” who is typically a veteran attorney or retired judge, to help them try to settle their lawsuit. The mediator typically meets with the parties together, then meets with the parties privately to discuss the relative strengths and weaknesses of the parties’ respectively positions, and tries to get the parties to make settlement demands and counter-offers back and forth with the ultimate goal of reaching a settlement.  If the parties cannot reach a settlement, the mediation ends. The mediator cannot force the parties to settle their dispute. Generally, mediation is a voluntary process.

Arbitration, on the other hand, is much more formal and binding. The process of arbitration requires a dispute to be submitted, by agreement of the parties, to a binding decisionmaker, the arbitrator. The arbitrator listens to witnesses testify and considers evidence much like a judge or jury, and then renders a written decision. The case is resolved by an arbitrator in a confidential forum, but the arbitrator’s decision can be filed with a Court and converted into a formal judgment against the losing party. Goosmann Law’s litigation attorneys mediate and arbitrate cases routinely.

When do you get a hearing? 

A hearing is used as an opportunity to present oral arguments regarding a motion, such as moving forward with the trial or settling the case out of court. Ultimately, a hearing will determine how the trial proceeds. A hearing is similar to a trial in the way that it is held publicly and involves both parties, however, a hearing is much more informal. Hearings are usually shorter than trials, and often do not involve the introduction of any evidence or testimony. Some hearings can result in the resolution of the case itself prior to trial, as one party is able to show it’s legally entitled to an award or dismissal regardless of the factual disputes.

When and how can you appeal a court decision?

An appeal is often brought to the appellate court by way of a written appellate brief filed by the counsel of each party involved in a case. This brief will discuss the judge’s decision and argue that the law was incorrectly applied in this particular case. This brief may be filed as soon as the judge’s decision has been made and the appeal will hold more weight than the proceedings of the trial.

How often are cases taken in the Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court receives approximately 7,000 to 8,000 petitions for writ of certiorari each term, however, the court only grants and hears oral arguments in about 80 cases. The case would first be heard by your local federal district court, and then by a federal circuit court of appeals.

When are cases taken to the court of appeals?

The majority of decisions made in state and federal trial court are subject to review by an appeals court. An appellate court hears cases on appeal from another court depending on the circumstance. The job of an appellate court is to review the proceedings of the trial for any errors and they may reverse decisions if they see fit. The lawyers for both parties will then submit a brief that will determine whether or not they will be allowed to give an oral argument regarding the decision of the court. Once an appellate court decision has been made, the opportunity for further appeal is limited.

How do you prepare for oral argument?

A good oral argument requires a deep understanding of the law and the facts of the particular case and you’re in luck. We put in the effort to know your case as well as possible, preparing us for whatever questions the court would have in oral argument.  Our team of attorneys has a countless amount of experience in trial court and we will work with you to make sure that your goals are met. We will come prepared with an effective argument with the intent to win your case.

How do you set a case budget?

A case budget is largely dependent on the content of the case and an attorney can help you establish a budget to fit the needs of your case. The case budget may also be based on the amount of court costs to be paid, or for the fees paid to experts, mediators, arbitrators, or jury consultants.

One of my customers has not paid me. Do I sue them?

Before you choose to sue, there are a few steps that you should take before you decide. First assess your own performance and ask yourself if you carried out services properly or if your client had any concerns about your performance. Secondly, see if matters can be settled outside of the courtroom; it may be possible to reach fair compensation this way. Also, consider the costs. Lastly, consider the consequences of a law suit. If following these steps does not result in payment, contact one of our attorneys as it may be time to sue.

Suing a customer for non-payment is an option and is relatively simple to implement. Entrepreneurs can take advantage of smalls claims court as a resource as this state court resolves disputes involving smaller amounts of money. A small claims court judgement ultimately holds the same weight as any other judgement made in a state court and is effective as a collection technique. However, the smalls claims court in your state may place a limit on the amount a plaintiff can sue for and they may limit the number of suits that can be filed per year. Let us help you to retrieve the money that you are owed, call a Goosmann attorney today.

I think one of my employees is stealing proprietary information. What should I do?

First, review your company policies regarding the handling of confidential information; it may be time to update these policies. Second, conduct an internal investigation to gather evidence; this may require the help of an accountant, attorney or IT specialist. Finally, interview the employee after gathering all possible information from other sources.

The construction project is not meeting the specifications or timeline we wanted. We (the owners) are not happy. What can we do?

Don’t panic. Call Goosmann Law Firm and let our skilled construction attorneys assume your problem and make it their own.  We understand how frustrating it can be when a construction project does not meet an owner’s expectations. We will advise you of your options, and represent your interests both during construction and post-construction.

What we offer


Goosmann Law represents various businesses and industries in the administrative law arena. Our attorneys handle matters before the Iowa Utilities Board, the Department of Labor, OSHA, and various other state and federal administrative agencies and departments. We understand the procedures which apply in administrative matters, and can navigate your business through the administrative arena.

You go golfing with your business owner friend who happens to also be in the same industry.  You get to chatting and he mentions his pricing. You happen to have the same pricing and agree not to raise the prices. Now, you’ve accidently put yourself in a tough spot in an antitrust investigation. This is just one of many situations that happens often – where CEOs and business owners commit felonies they don’t even know they’ve committed. Our Sioux City, Sioux Falls and Omaha attorneys help CEOs and business owners remain compliant with antitrust and trade regulations, and provide legal assistance when actual or potential antitrust violations have occurred.

How we can help:

  • Antitrust investigations
  • Antitrust litigation
  • Government investigations
  • Antitrust compliance, counseling, and audits
  • Unfair competition
  • Structuring distribution arrangements
  • Mergers and acquisitions

Unintentional Felonies Every CEO Needs to Know About

Top 5 Legal Mistakes Business Clients Make

When the outcome of your case didn’t go the way you expected, you don’t have to tackle the appeals process alone. Our appellate lawyers have extensive experience appealing adverse judgments, including in cases in which Goosmann Law did not even handle the underlying trial.

The appellate process is very different from normal litigation. You want an attorney that understands the nuances of appellate law.

We Have the Resources: Goosmann Law is a full-service law firm. We have access to all the resources needed to ensure your case is handled as effectively as possible and given the attention it deserves.

We Are Knowledgeable: Goosmann Law understands the differences between appellate and trial law. We know the appellate procedures, and we possess the skills needed to draft successful appellate briefs and argue successfully in open court before a panel of appellate judges.

Our legal team is your solid trial advocate in banking and finance matters. We have a depth of experience handling complex litigation matters representing fiduciary institutions within the following areas:

  • Complex commercial litigation
  • Consumer financial services litigation
  • Consumer fraud litigation
  • Insurance coverage litigation
  • Indian tribal finance litigation
  • Securities and financial litigation

Goosmann Law has many attorneys who “speak banking.” Those lawyers understand the nuances of bankruptcy litigation, they know the laws, they know the judges, and they are prepared to provide aggressive representation to receive the best possible results for you and your company.

Goosmann Law Firm represents local, regional and national companies in a variety of bankruptcy and creditors’ rights matters, from the complex to the routine, in both business and consumer bankruptcy situations. Our attorneys help obtain relief from the automatic stay provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, obtain adequate protection for the use of secured creditors’ collateral, and reaffirmation of debts, as well as more complex matters such as bankruptcy sales, plan negotiation, and debtor-in-possession financing.

Here’s how we can help:

  • Debt Restructuring and Out-of-Court Workouts
  • Business Bankruptcy (Chapter 7 & Chapter 11 Reorganization)
  • Bankruptcy Litigation
  • Representation of Bankruptcy Trustees

Call one of our Sioux City, Sioux Falls or Omaha attorneys today to learn more.


Yep. We know how our clients feel when they get served with lawsuit papers. Don’t panic – just give us a call.

Yep. We know how our clients feel when they get served with lawsuit papers. Don’t panic – just give us a call.

When a contract is breached or a company is threatened, Goosmann Law is there. Our business litigators handle cases involving allegations of interference with contracts, breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation, dealership and franchise law, trade secrets, and various other business and commercial disputes. When a business is wronged or receives a claim, we use our legal instincts and business judgment. Goosmann Law can work with you to resolve complex business disputes that include bet-the-company and precedent-setting cases. However, while not afraid to take a case to trial, we never lose sight of a client’s business goals and seek efficient resolutions to disputes when warranted.

Goosmann Law represents businesses of all sizes during litigation. We provide sound legal advice and present reasonable alternatives for resolution where appropriate. We handle mediations, arbitrations and other forms of dispute resolution. Our Sioux City, Sioux Falls and Omaha attorneys handle matters efficiently, while bringing a fresh perspective to each case.

Visit our Litigation and Trial Law page for more information.

  • Business & Commercial Litigation
  • Business Disputes
  • Contract Litigation
  • Fraud
  • Trade Secrets Litigation
  • Arbitration & Mediation
  • Misrepresentation
  • Dealership and Franchise Law
  • Securities Litigation
  • Shareholder, Directors, and Officers Litigation
  • TCPA Litigation Defense
  • Compliance Counseling
  • False Claims Act/Qui Tam
  • Investigations & Board Counseling

Our clients range from small businesses, professionals, commercial banks, industrial companies, insurance companies and non-profit organizations to name a few. Our team understands that litigation can be a complicated process, but we will work with you every step of the way to receive the results you desire. We know that you won’t lose sight of your business goals and neither will we.

No one understands the phrase “time is money” better than construction companies. The Goosmann Law Firm has represented owners, general contractors, developers, architects, subcontractors, engineers, suppliers, insurers and lenders in countless disputes, state and federal court lawsuits and arbitrations. Your case is just as important. Goosmann Law’s construction lawyers strive to bring greater predictability to their clients by being proactive and providing candid legal advice. Clients in the construction industry often have legal needs that cross many different disciplines. Goosmann’s construction lawyers represent the full spectrum of businesses associated with the construction industry.  Let us help you to reach a solution that benefits you!

Do you have a contract with a company, vendor, contractor, or individual that’s been breached?  We can help you with your contract litigation.  Here’s how we can help you:

  • Breach of contract:
    • Asset Purchase Agreement
    • Stock Purchase Agreement
    • Agreement for the sale of goods
    • Purchase order
    • Bill of sale
    • Warranty and limited warranty
    • Security agreements
    • Employment agreements
    • Employee noncompete agreements
    • Independent contractor agreements
    • Consulting agreement
    • Distributor agreement
    • Sales representative agreement
    • Confidentiality agreement
    • Nondisclosure agreement
    • Employment separation agreement
    • Real property lease
    • Equipment lease
    • Franchise agreement
    • Advertising agency agreement
    • Indemnity agreement
    • Settlement agreement
    • Release
    • Assignment of contract
    • Partnership agreement
    • Joint venture agreement

We know you don’t want your employee’s defense claim and HR headaches to slow down your business and neither do we. As a member of the employment defense panel of insurers, our team not only understands your employment litigation needs, we anticipate them. Our employment litigation attorneys know witnesses and business operations matter. Let us be HR’s first call.

Our attorneys not only understand health law, they also have years of experience working in the healthcare industry. Our trial and health law experience can help you with your most complex healthcare-related litigation needs to achieve the best outcome for you. Goosmann Law’s attorneys are prepared to help.

Insurance coverage litigation is primarily an issue of what the insurance policy actually covers vs. what the party thinks is owed. Our skilled team of attorneys will guide you through the claims process and help you negotiate coverage capital.

An employee left your business to go work for a competitor. During their time of employment they had access to valuable company trade secrets. Now you worry that your secrets might be shared to your competitor’s advantage. Don’t give away your secret sauce, call a Goosmann attorney today!

Our team can help you with the steps and process of mediation and arbitration during a dispute.

Call us today for your case’s mediation and arbitration needs.

Goosmann Law defends and advises clients in various matters involving investigations, enforcement actions, and private and mass action litigation based on toxic torts, strict liability, negligence, and environmental statutes and regulations. Even when limited to a single product or one-time occurrence, these cases can become complex, substantial, and challenging. Goosmann Law Firm is able to navigate you through the issues at hand.

  • Product Liability Litigation
  • Mass tort litigation
  • Toxic tort litigation

Real estate deals don’t always work out.  Call us to help you during a real estate litigation!

A shareholder of a corporation may file a derivative suit against management for dishonesty, fraud or even mismanagement. Shareholder derivative suits are unique because corporate laws mandate that management is responsible for handling the suit alone when a shareholder brings action against parties within a corporation.



Goosmann Law’s trial team settled a trade secret dispute which encompassed lawsuits in both Iowa state court as well as a parallel lawsuit in Portugal. Goosmann Law represented a manufacturer of nutraceuticals (food containing health-giving additives and medicinal benefit) with national and international clients. The disputes included claims of trade secret theft and misappropriation, as well as allegations of unfair competition related to the alleged misbranding and adulteration/dilution of manufactured nutraceutical products. Goosmann Law prevailed on two interlocutory appeal in the Iowa case – both argued successfully before the Iowa Supreme Court – before the cases eventually settled. One of the appeals involved a personal jurisdiction issue, and the other appeal involved the issue of whether Goosmann Law’s client could be compelled to produce its Standard Operating Procedures (its “secret sauce”) in “Confidential” format as opposed to “Attorneys’ Eyes Only” format as contemplated by the parties’ Protective Order. The lawsuits were resolved through confidential settlement agreements.


A team of Goosmann Law attorneys handled a 15-day jury trial in Louisiana federal court involving breach of contract claims between two manufacturing companies that had entered into a joint venture agreement. Goosmann Law’s client obtained a significant jury verdict, while the opposing party’s claim for $25+ million was flatly rejected by the jury. The case involved a mistrial during jury selection (not Goosmann Law’s fault), countless witnesses and exhibits, evidence produced by the opposing party for the first time at trial, and jury deliberations that spanned multiple days.


Goosmann Law represented one of the largest conference call providers in the United States in Iowa and South Dakota federal court lawsuits filed by Verizon and Sprint, as well as in related state utility board proceedings in Iowa and South Dakota. In the lawsuits, Goosmann Law’s client was accused of improperly charging and collecting millions of dollars in “access charges” from Verizon and Sprint. After significant litigation, the lawsuits were resolved. The terms of the parties’ settlements are confidential.


Goosmann Law obtained a jury verdict for a general contractor in South Dakota state court. In the lawsuit, Goosmann Law’s client sought to foreclose on a mechanics’ lien which had been filed on the owner’s property after the owner failed to pay for services rendered. In response, the property owner asserted counterclaims, alleging Goosmann Law’s client provided defective construction services. The jury found for Goosmann Law’s client, and refused to award any damages to the owner on the owner’s counterclaims. In addition, Goosmann Law’s client recovered substantial legal fees through post-trial motions.


Goosmann Law represented a telephone carrier in a federal court lawsuit filed by a company that provided business conference call services and recorded content and audio streams, as well as a related lawsuit venued in Maryland state court. The lawsuits involved allegations that Goosmann Law’s client breached one or more contracts. After significant litigation, the lawsuits were resolved globally through a confidential settlement agreement.


Two Goosmann Law Firm attorneys represented an Omaha area bank creditor in an adversary bankruptcy proceeding. The opposing party, a business owner, filed for bankruptcy claiming his assets had inflatedvalues. In his persistence to show his company’s value, the opposing party gave fraudulent accounts receivable and claimed he had a rare 1963 50 cent coin with only 5 in the world. The adverse party also claimed that the bank owed him millions alleging that they didn’t sell his collateral for fair market value. One of the Goosmann attorneys was at the time hired as a coin expert prior to joining the Goosmann team. They attorney has immense past experience in the coin business confirming that the adverse party was making false claims. The twists and turns of this case continued and at the end the court ruled for the adverse party to pay Goosmann’s bank client due to finding fraudulent false documents and misrepresented financial records. The opposing party’s loan to the bank was not discharged and the bank client walked away with a win.


A Goosmann Law Firm Attorney, as local counsel, represented third party administrator (TPA) Broadspire  defending a workers compensation insurance “bad faith” claim asserted by an injured worker against Broadspire and the insurer, Indemnity Insurance Company of North America. The federal court, on a pre-trial basis, asked the Iowa Supreme Court to first decide whether, as a matter of law, TPAs in Iowa could be held liable for workers compensation insurance “bad faith”  when benefits were allegedly not paid in a timely fashion. The Iowa Supreme Court ruled in favor of  Broadspire, holding that TPAs  cannot be sued in Iowa for workers compensation “bad faith”. As a result, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit was dismissed against Broadspire.  The Iowa Supreme Court decision is a case of first impression and establishes significant new substantive law in the State of Iowa.


A Goosmann Law Firm attorney represented a large insurance company in a case v. Michala Thompson. The defendant started a fire at a church, causing significant damage to the building and the property inside. The insurance company, under their policy with their insured, paid over $600,000 due to the intentional and illegal actions of the defendant and the damage she caused. After nearly a year of litigation and delay tactics employed by the defendant,  Goosmann was able to obtain a judgment of over $600,000, with limited cost to the client and without needing to go to trial.


Past case results do not indicate the outcome of your case and case results are not typical.


Sioux Pharm. Inc. v. Eagle Lab., 865 N.W.2d 528 (Iowa 2015). (Prosecuted corporate trade secret case and Lanham Act claims; prevailed on interlocutory appeal to Iowa Supreme Court, regarding disclosure of client’s trade secrets).

Sioux Pharm. Inc. v. Summit Nutritionals Int'l Inc., 859 N.W.2d 182 (Iowa 2015). (Prosecuted corporate trade secret case; prevailed on interlocutory appeal to Iowa Supreme Court, regarding personal jurisdiction over international neutraceutical manufacturer and distributor).

Legried Farms, Inc. v. Nuhn Indus., No. 0:10CV04958, 2010 WL 5523091 (D. Minn. Dec. 22, 2010). (Represented ag dealer in business and franchise dispute with Canadian manufacturer; case resolved at mediation).


Haas v. Experian Info. Sols. Inc., No. 4:17-CV-00041-JAJ-HCA (S.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Mar. 2, 2018).

Zola v. TD Ameritrade, Inc., No. 16-3013, No. 16-3016, No. 16-3019, 889 F.3d 920 (United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, May 10, 2018). (Appeal related to retail investors class actin lawsuit against the brokerage firm related to its practice of routing orders).

Levin v. Miller, No. 1:11-cv-1264- SEB-TAB, 2012 WL 12871193 (United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division, Sept. 27, 2018). (Prosecution of D&O litigation against former officers and directors of a failed bank holding company).

De Dios v. Indem. Ins. Co. of N. Am., No. C 18-4015-MWB, 2018 WL 3420810 (N.D. Iowa July 13, 2018). (Defense of insurance bad faith claims).

United Specialty Ins. Co. v. AMBE MA Iowa Inc., No. 5:17-CV-04045 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Aug. 14, 2018). (Insurance contract dispute).

BH Servs. Inc. v. FCE Benefit Administrators Inc., No. 5:16-CV-50545-KES, 2018 WL 3222512 (D. S.D. June 28, 2018). (Defense of ERISA and breach of contract claims).

Riverport Ins. Co. v. Espinoza, No. C18-4041-LTS (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement July 26, 2018). (Insurance contract dispute).

Fergin v. XPO, No. 8:16CV26, 2018 WL 5810496 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Nov. 6, 2018). (Represented Insurance Company protecting workers’ compensation lien).

Fergin v. Westrock Company, No. 8:16CV26, 2018 WL 3032551 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, June 15, 2018). (Represented Insurance Company protecting workers’ compensation lien).

Ameritas Life Ins. Corp. v. Bank of Am. No. 4:17-CV-03128, (D. Neb. dismissed per settlement Dec. 4, 2017). (Defense of commercial claims on an issue of first impression in Nebraska. Helped establish the “no-duty” rule as Federal precedent in the state; this rule stands for the proposition that banks owe no-duty of care to non-clients, including fraudsters and those who have been the victims of identity theft merely because the imposter opened an account at the defendant bank and used this account to perpetrate a fraud.)

Aschoff v. State, No. A–16–249, 2017 WL 1653629 (Court of Appeals of Nebraska, May 2, 2017). (Negligence, Premises Liability, and Workers’ Compensation Plaintiff’s case).

Gowan v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, No. CIV 14-5025, 2016 WL 775758 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Western Division, Feb. 25, 2016). (Defense of workers’ compensation insurance back faith claim).

Myers v. Blumenthal, No. 8:14CV57, 534 B.R. 6 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, June 23, 2015). (Represented creditor in adversary proceeding).

Oyens Feed & Supply, Inc. v. Primebank, No. 14–CV–4114–DEO, 2015 WL 2130850 (United States District Court, N.D. Iowa, Western Division, May 7, 2015)(Secured Transactions Statutory Construal of IA Code 570A and its application as to priority lienholders).

In re Crooked Creek Corp., Bankruptcy No. 09–02352, 533 B.R. 274 (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Iowa, Apr. 13, 2015)(Secured Transactions Statutory Construal of IA Code 570A and its application as to priority lienholders).

Verdieck v. TD Ameritrade, Inc., No. 8:14CV289, 2015 WL 13216410 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Aug. 17, 2015). (Prosecution of class action lawsuit against brokerage company related to its pratice of routing orders).

State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Toshiba America Information Systems, Inc., No. 8:13CV138, 2015 WL 4742599 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Aug. 11, 2015). (Represented Insurance company in subrogation action for product liability).

In re Schley, Bankruptcy No. 10–03252, 509 B.R. 901 (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Iowa, Apr. 18, 2014)(Secured Transactions Statutory Construal of IA Code 570A and its application as to priority lienholders).

Farm Credit Services of America, FLCA v. Haun, Nos. 12–3077, 12–3078, 734 F.3d 800 (United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, Aug. 20, 2013). (Represented investors in cattle feed yard in adversary proceeding and subsequent appeal to Eigth Circuit).

State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Watts Water Technologies, Inc, No. 4:13CV3037, 2013 WL 5278330 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Sept. 18, 2013). (Represented Plaintiff Insurance Company in product liability case).

State Farm Fire and Cas. Co. v. Interline Brands, Inc., No. 4:13CV3037, 2013 WL 3367386 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, July 3, 2013). (Represented insurance company in subrogation action regarding product liability).

Churchill v. Columbus Community Hosp., Inc., No. S–12–452, 285 Neb. 759 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, Apr. 25, 2013). (Premises Liability vs. Professional Negligence in a “slip and fall” case at an aquatic therapy provider).

In re Borromeo, Bankruptcy No. 10–81423–TJM, 2012 WL 3780540 (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Nebraska, Aug. 31, 2012). (Represented large bank ensuring adequate protection and proper treatment in Bankruptcy Plan).

In re Rose, Bankruptcy No. BK05–83572–TJM, 2012 WL 2118205 (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Nebraska, June 11, 2012). (Represented Bank in adversary proceeding against borrower in cause of action for nondischargability related to fraud and misrepresentation).

Caruso v. Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Maryland, No. 3:11–cv–19–RLY–WGH, 2012 WL 2861694 (United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Evansville Division, July 11, 2012). (Prosecution of D&O Bond related litigation against regarding a failed bank holding company).

Farm Credit Services of America, PCA v. Haun, No. 8:11CV320, 2012 WL 3991468 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Sept. 11, 2012). (Represented investors in cattle feed yard in adversary proceeding and subsequent appeal to Eigth Circuit).

Oyens Feed & Supply, Inc. v. Primebank, 808 N.W.2d 186 (Iowa 2011)(Secured Transactions Statutory Construal of IA Code 570A and its application as to priority lienholders).

United States v. Maassen, No. 5:04-CV-04112 (N.D. Iowa Apr. 27, 2011). (Defense of IRS tax dispute).

In re Andrews, Bankruptcy No. BK08–81287–TLS, 2009 WL 6338013 (United States Bankruptcy Court. D. Nebraska, Dec. 18, 2009). (Represented Creditor ensuring adequate protection and proper treatment in plan of reorganization).

In re Thacker, Bankruptcy No. BK07–40498–TJM, 2008 WL 361033 (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Nebraska, Feb. 8, 2008). (Represented Creditor ensuring adequate protection and proper treatment in plan of reorganization).

Pinnacle Bank v. Darland Const. Co., No. S–04–1062, 270 Neb. 978 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, Jan. 27, 2006). (Represented Lender in dispute with contractor regarding priority to garnished funds).

Omaha Cold Storage Terminals, Inc. v. The Hartford Ins. Co., No. 8:03CV445, 2006 WL 695456 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Mar. 17, 2006). (Defense of insurance company regarding claims by insured for insurance coverage for building collapse).

Wulf v. Adaptive Motion Control Systems, Inc., No. 4:01CV3095, 2003 WL 168649 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Jan. 24, 2003). (Represented family in breach of contract against insurance company for failure to pay beneficiaries insurance proceeds).


Larson Manufacturing Company of South Dakota, Inc. v. Western Showcase Homes, Inc., No. 4:16-CV-04118-VLD, 2018 WL 6528250 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, Dec. 11, 2018). (Defense and counterclaim of commercial real estate development project and debt dispute).

Larson Manufacturing Company of South Dakota, Inc. v. American Modular Housing Group, LLC, No. 4:16–CV–04118–VLD, 2018 WL 627185 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, Jan. 30, 2018). (Defense and counterclaim of commercial real estate development project and debt dispute).

DLR Group, Inc. v. Oskaloosa Community School Dist., No. 15–0356, 881 N.W.2d 470 (Table) (Court of Appeals of Iowa, Feb. 10, 2016). (Appeal of construction arbitration award ).

Design Basics, L.L.C. v. Carhart Lumber Company, No. 8:13CV125, 2016 WL 424974 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Feb. 3, 2016). (Partial summary judgment in favor of lumberyard regarding claims under the Copyright Act related to alleged infringement of architectural plans).

Aggregate Const. Inc. v. Aaron Swan & Associates, Inc., No. 27383, 871 N.W.2d 508 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, Oct. 28, 2015). (Defense of breach of contract and negligence action arising out of sodium-soundness testing for road construction project).

Nat. Riggers & Erectors Inc. v. Merrill Iron & Steel Inc., No. 5:04-cv-04026-PAZ (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Aug. 10, 2005). (Represented steel subcontractor in major, multi-level construction litigation and defense of bond claim; case resolved at mediation).

Cyber and Technology 

Great Lakes Commc’ns Corp. v. AT&T Corp., No. 5:13CV04117, 2013 WL 6846313 (N.D. Iowa Dec. 18, 2013). (Represented Local Exchange Carrier in complex commercial dispute regarding Telecommunications Act claims; case pending on referral to Federal Communications Commission).

Community Voiceline L.L.C. v. Great Lakes Commc’ns Corp., No. 12-cv-4048-MWB, 2012 WL 6658500 (N.D. Iowa Nov. 16, 2012). (Represented Local Exchange Carrier in commercial dispute. Resolved following mediation).

N. Valley Commc’n L.L.C. v. Qwest Commc’ns Corp., No. 09-1004-CBK, 2012 WL 6611108 (D. S.D. Apr. 9, 2012). (Represented national conference call provider in multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers.)

In re Tier 1 Jeg Telecomm. Cases, Nos. 4:07-cv-00043, 4:07-cv-00078, 3:09-cv-00058, 4:07-cv-00194, 4:08-cv-00005, 3:09-cv-00055, 3:09-cv-59, 5:08-cv-04095, 5:09-cv-04017, 2011 WL 13103367 (S.D. Iowa Sept. 26, 2011). (Represented national conference call provider in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers.)

Great Lakes Commc’ns Corp. v. Level 3 Commc’ns L.L.C., No. 5:09-CV-04090 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement June 16, 2010). (Represented Local Exchange Carrier in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

Qwest Commc’ns Co. L.L.C. v. Tekstar Commc’ns, Inc., No. 0:10-CV-00490 (D. Minn. filed Feb. 19, 2010). (Represented national conference call provider in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

Great Lakes Commc’ns Corp. v. Global Crossing Telecomm. Inc., No. 5:09-CV-04056 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement July 31, 2009). (Represented Local Exchange Carrier in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers. Case resolved at mediation).

Great Lakes Commc’ns Corp. v. Iowa Utilities Board, No. 509CV04085, 2009 WL 5818638 (N.D. Iowa Nov. 12, 2009). (Represented Local Exchange Carrier in multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

N. Valley Commc’ns, L.L.C. v. MCI Commc’ns Servs. Inc., No. 107CV01016, 2009 WL 3103691 (D. S.D. Apr. 10, 2009). (Represented national conference call provider in multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

Sancom Inc. v. Sprint Commc’ns Co., No. 407CV04107, 2009 WL 4784060 (D. S.D. Oct. 20, 2009). (Represented national conference call provider in multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

Qwest Commc’ns Corp. v. Superior Tel. Coop., No. 4:07-cv-00078-JEG-RAW, 2008 WL 2472889 (S.D. Iowa June 13, 2008). (Represented national conference call provider in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

N. Valley Commc’ns L.L.C. v. Sprint Commc’ns Co., No. 108CV01003, 2008 WL 3892593 (D. S.D. May 19, 2008). (Represented national conference call provider in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

Mcleodusa Telecomm. Servs. Inc. v. Qwest Corp., No. 106CV0035133, 2008 WL 1756703 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 4, 2008). (Represented Local Exchange Carrier in Telecommunications Act and breach of contract dispute).

Sprint Commc’ns Co. v. Aventure Commc’ns L.L.C., No. 4:07-CV-00194 (S.D. Iowa filed May 07, 2007). (Represented national conference call provider in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

AT&T Corp. v. Aventure Commc’ns Tech., No. 4:07-CV-00043 (S.D. Iowa filed Jan. 29, 2007). (Represented national conference call provider in complex multi-party Telecommunications Act and tort claims litigation with Interexchange carriers).

McLeodUSA Telecomm. Servs. Inc. v. Creative Commc’ns Inc., No. 1:06-CV-00037 (N.D. Iowa Nov. 30, 2006).

Midwest Athletics & Sports All. L.L.C. v. Xerox Corp., No. 8:17CV478, 2018 WL 1400426 (D. Neb. Mar. 20, 2018). (Defense of patent dispute; local counsel).

Denenberg v. ECO Health Inc., No. 8:18CV279, 2018 WL 5904449 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Nov. 9, 2018). (Defense of copyright, DMCA claims related to use of copyrighted photographs in advertisements).

Great Lakes Commc’ns Corp. v. Terrill, 5:16-CV-0408 (N.D. Iowa 2016). (Prosecution of claims for telecommunications provider regarding zoning and permitting issues).

Aventure Commc’ns Tech. L.L.C. v. MCI Commc’ns Servs. Inc., No. 5:07-CV-04095 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Oct. 20, 2016). (Prosecution of Telecommunications Act claims against Interexchange Carriers).

Littlejohn v. Thompson Elec. Co., No. C15-4013-MWB, 2015 WL 5882975 (N.D. Iowa Oct. 7, 2015). (Defense of employment law claims).

Affiliated Foods Midwest Coop., Inc. v. Integrated Distribution Solutions, LLC, No. 8:06CV532, 460 F.Supp.2d 1068 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Oct. 23, 2006). (Motion to compel arbitration regarding customer claims related to software components).


Palmquist v. Luverne Truck Equipment/Travelers Ins. Co., No. 28328 (Supreme Court of South Dakota) (Defense of appeal of workers’ compensation claim).

Koch v. Tracy, No. 4:15-CV-04102-KES, 2016 WL 3817214 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, July 12, 2016). (Defense of employer against wrongful termination and defamation claims).

Anderson v. Northland Restaurant Group, LLC, No. CIV 14-5005, 2016 WL 1258748 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Western Division, Mar. 28, 2016). (Defense of employer against sexual harassment claims).

Axness v. Aqreva LLC, No. CIV 14–4078, 118 F.Supp.3d 1144 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, July 27, 2015). (Defense of employer against gender and pregnancy discrimination claims).

Fahey v. Twin City Fan Companies, Ltd., No. Civ. 11–4171–KES, 994 F.Supp.2d 1064 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, Jan. 13, 2014). (Defense of employer against disability discrimination claim).

Kroontje v. CKE Restaurants, Inc., No. CIV. 13–4066–KES, 2014 WL 1513895 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, Apr. 16, 2014). (Defense of employer against sexual harassment claim).

Waterman v. Morningside Manor, No. 26631, 839 N.W.2d 567 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, Oct. 30, 2013). (Defense of employer against workers’ compensation claim).

Miller v. Opportunities Unlimited, No. 5:12-CV-04058 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Dec. 31, 2012). (Defense of Family Medical Leave Act claim and employment dispute.)

Nichols v. City of Mitchell, No. CIV 11–4016, 914 F.Supp.2d 1052 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, Nov. 9, 2012). (Defense of employer against disability discrimination claim).

Peterson v. Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Soc., No. 26214, 816 N.W.2d 843 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, June 27, 2012). (Defense of employer against workers’ compensation claim).

Haigh v. Gelita USA, Inc., 632 F.3d 464 (8th Cir. 2011). (Defense of employment claims).

General Litigation

Vandenberg v. Petco Animal Supplies Stores Inc., No. 17-2580, 2017 WL 4557150 (8th Cir. argued June 13, 2018). (Defense of tort and products liability claims. Briefed case to Eighth Circuit in support of defense judgment; ruling pending).

ConcealFab Corp. v. Sabre Indus Inc., No. 15-cv-01793-CMA-KLM, 2017 WL 6297672 (D. Colo. Dec. 11, 2017). (Defense and prosecution of commercial and trade secret claims related to business acquisition dispute; post trial bench ruling pending).

Knobloch v. Home Warranty Inc., No. C15-4239-MWB, 2016 WL 6662709 (N.D. Iowa Nov. 10, 2016). (Defense of business valuation and shareholder dispute).

Soil Analytics, L.L.C. v. Autoprobe Tech. L.L.C., No. 4:15-cv-104, 2015 WL 12669617 (S.D. Iowa Oct. 26, 2015). (Represented business in patent and breach of contract case).

Fiechtner v. Wheeler, No. 27664 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, Sept. 6, 2016) (Summary Affirmance). (Defense of appeal of child support modification proceeding).

Wichman v. Shabino, No. 26835, 851 N.W.2d 202 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, July 9, 2014). (Prosecution of claim regarding former spouse’s failure to pay marital debt).

In re Nelson Living Trust, No. 26585, 835 N.W.2d 874 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, July 31, 2013). (Prosecution of ex-wife’s petition for allowance of claim against ex-husband’s estate for compensation for nursing services provided before his death).

Thompson v. Avera Queen of Peace Hosp., No. 26296, 827 N.W.2d 570 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, Jan 16, 2013). (Defense of jury verdict for doctor and hospital in case alleging medical malpractice).

Pennfield Oil Co. v. Alpharma, Inc., No. 8:09CV345, 2010 WL 4689583 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Nov. 10, 2010). (Prosecution of false advertising claims related to medicated animal feed).

Shell v. Sudan, No. 8:08CV260, 2010 WL 1740690 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Apr. 28, 2010). (Defense of medical malpractice claims).

Kubik v. Bracht, No. 4:09CV3050, 2010 WL 1052196 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Mar. 18, 2010). (Defense of state court officials related to divorce judgment).

RFD-TV, LLC v. MCC Magazines, LLC, No. 8:10CV43, 2010 WL 749732 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Mar. 1, 2010). (Motion to compel arbitration related to television contracts).

Ferer v. Aaron Ferer & Sons Co., No. A–07–773, 16 Neb.App. 866 (Court of Appeals of Nebraska, July 29, 2008). (Appeal related to gift of company stock.).

Lee v. Bhattacharya, No. 804CV101, 2007 WL 2011269 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, June 1, 2007). (Defense of neglegent entrustment theory for an automobile accident).

Scollard v. Rocky Mountain Holding Co., No. 4:06CV3196, 2007 WL 119166 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Jan. 9, 2007). (Wrongful death defense related to helicopter crash).

Manske v. Rocky Mountain Holding Co., No. 4:06CV3198, 2007 WL 119165 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Jan. 9, 2007). (Wrongful death defense related to helicopter crash).

Ferer v. Erickson & Sederstrom, P.C., No. S-05-619, 272 Neb. 470 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, Oct. 27, 2006). (Legal malpractice defense brought by shareholder related to gift of company stock).

Wise v. Omaha Public Schools, No. S–05–491, 271 Neb. 635 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, May 26, 2006). (Appeal related to automobile accident and notice of claims under the Political Subdivisions Tort Claims Act).

Fitl v. Stek, No. S–03–836, 269 Neb. 51 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, Jan. 7, 2005). (Represented Seller in Breach of Contract case regarding rare baseball card and alleged alteration of Mickey Mantle rookie card).

Isom v. Heller, No. 8:04CV70, 2005 WL 661696 (United States District Court, D. Nebraska, Mar. 21, 2005). (Defense and summary judgment in favor of police officers for alleged section 1983 violations).

Guerrier v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., No. S–01–1102, 266 Neb. 150 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, June 20, 2003). (Appeal to obtain med pay coverage under a driver’s insurance policy).

In re Estate of Sorenson-Peters, Court of Appeals of Iowa. October 31, 2012 824 N.W.2d 561, 2012 WL 5355712 (Wrongful Death determination re disposition of insurance and business evaluations).

Johnson for V.J. v. Johnson, No. 3:17-CV-03001-RAL, 2018 WL 1536320 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Central Division, Jan. 16, 2018). (Defense of negligence action based on ATV accident resulting in serious injury).

Larson v. Securiguard Inc., No. 8:17CV52, 2017, WL 3601228 (D. Neb. Aug. 18, 2017). (Defense of ERISA claims).

L&M Ethanol Maint. Contracting Inc. v. Easy Automation Inc., No. 3:17-CV-03085 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Dec. 4, 2017).

United States for Use and Benefit of Ash Equipment Co., Inc. v. Morris, Inc., No. 4:14–CV–04131–VLD, 2017 WL 3396408 (United States District Court, D. South Dakota, Southern Division, Aug. 8, 2017). (Defense of Miller Act claims arising out of construction on dam repair project).

United States v. Thompson, No. 5:16-CV-04075 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Jan. 27, 2016). (Defense of IRS claims related to research and development business tax credits).

Soil Analytics, L.L.C. v. Autoprobe Tech. L.L.C., No. 4:15-cv-104, 2015 WL 12669617 (S.D. Iowa Oct. 26, 2015). (Represented business in patent and breach of contract case).

In re DVI Inc., No. 1:03-BK-12656 (Bankr. D. Del. May 18, 2015).

Bertrand v. Mullin, 846 N.W.2d 884 (Iowa 2014). (Obtained jury verdict in lawsuit for defamation of client during political advertising campaign for senator. Argued before Iowa Supreme Court; verdict overturned. Filed writ of certiorari with United State Supreme Court; denied).

Waterman v. VS Holding Co., No. 5:10-CV-04038 (N.D. Iowa June 28, 2013).
Guinan v. Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica Inc., No. 3:10-CV-03007 (N.D. Iowa July 7, 2011).

In re Meyer, No. 4:10-BK-40672 (Bankr. D. S.D. filed Aug. 11, 2010).

Johnson v. Fed. Express Corp., No. 3:07-CV-03052 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Apr. 05, 2010).

In re The Conveyor Company, No. 08-02058, 2009 WL 2776079 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa Mar. 5, 2009) (Represented debtor in corporate bankruptcy and liquidation).

Boone v. Aramark Servs. Inc., No. 404CV90496, 2009 WL 1707652 (S.D. Iowa Mar. 26, 2009). (Defense of ERISA case involving breach of contract and fiduciary liability claim. Resolved case at mediation.)

In re Medieval Glass Indus. Inc., No. 09-00327S, 2009 WL 3756573 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa Nov. 9, 2009). (Represented debtor in corporate bankruptcy).

Colquhoun v. West Central Coop., No. LACV 020150 (Iowa Dist. Ct. 2007) (Mass action Defense of claims of over 300 plaintiffs for tortious toxic exposure to emissions of hydrochloric acid from plant and defended breach of contract and warranty claims against manufacturer. Case resolved at mediation).

Estate of Nelson v. Disetronic Medical Sys. Inc., No. 07-3012, 2007 WL 4446611 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 16, 2007). (Defense of medical devise product liability and warranty claims).

Miller v. Smokers Warehouse Corp., 737 N.W.2d 107 (Iowa 2007).

Iowa Info. Inc. v. Fujifilm Graphic Sys. Inc., No. 5:05-CV-04139 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement July 17, 2007).

Iowa Mold Tooling Co. Inc. v. Am. Crane Inc., No. 3:06-CV-03047 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Dec. 12, 2006).

Reiling v. Beurman, No. 3:04-CV-03082 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Dec. 12, 2005).

Rants v. Vilsack, 684 N.W.2d 193 (Iowa 2004). (Drafted amicus brief to Iowa Supreme Court).

Premier Farms L.C. v. Bank of Am. N.A., No. 03-04632S, 04-9035S, 2004 WL 1175223 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 2004) (Represented claimant in adversary proceeding).

Lubinus v. Wright Medical Tech. Inc., No. 5:04-CV-04030 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Feb. 13, 2004). (Defense of medical devise product liability claims).

Kuhl v. St. Gobain Advanced Ceramics Desmarquest, No. 5:03-CV-04099 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Nov. 8, 2004).

Nat’l Union Fire Ins. v. Terra Indus. Inc., No. 5:01-CV-04091 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement July 23, 2004). (Drafted writ of certiorari to United States Supreme Court; cert denied).


Iowa Mold Tooling Co. Inc. v. Am. Crane Inc., No. 3:06-CV-03047 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Dec. 12, 2006).

Reiling v. Beurman, No. 3:04-CV-03082 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Dec. 12, 2005).

Rants v. Vilsack, 684 N.W.2d 193 (Iowa 2004). (Drafted amicus brief to Iowa Supreme Court).

Premier Farms L.C. v. Bank of Am. N.A., No. 03-04632S, 04-9035S, 2004 WL 1175223 (Bankr. N.D. Iowa 2004) (Represented claimant in adversary proceeding).

Lubinus v. Wright Medical Tech. Inc., No. 5:04-CV-04030 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Feb. 13, 2004). (Defense of medical devise product liability claims).

Kuhl v. St. Gobain Advanced Ceramics Desmarquest, No. 5:03-CV-04099 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement Nov. 8, 2004).

Nat’l Union Fire Ins. v. Terra Indus. Inc., No. 5:01-CV-04091 (N.D. Iowa dismissed per settlement July 23, 2004). (Drafted writ of certiorari to United States Supreme Court; cert denied).

Real Estate

Laska v. Barr, No. 28094, 907 N.W.2d 47 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, Jan. 24, 2018). (Prosecution of appeal regarding proper interpretation of “right of first refusal”).

Hanson v. McCawley, No. A–15–890, 2016 WL 7094134 (Court of Appeals of Nebraska, Dec. 6, 2016). (Represented Plaintiff against insurance agent and company for failure to pay benefits under insurance policy).

Laska v. Barr, No. 27386, 27402, 876 N.W.2d 50 (Supreme Court of South Dakota, Feb. 10, 2016). (Prosecution of appeal regarding proper interpretation of “right of first refusal”).

Mapes v. U.S. Bank Nat. Ass’n, N.D., No. 14–1770, 872 N.W.2d 410 (Table) (Court of Appeals of Iowa, Oct. 28, 2015)(Boundary rights dispute as between two property owners).

The Lamar Co., LLC v. City of Fremont, No. S–08–590, 278 Neb. 485 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, Sept. 4, 2009). (Appeal related to ownership of non-conforming rights for billboards).

Metzger v. Village of Cedar Creek, Neb., No. 03-3051, 370 F.3d 822 (United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, June 8, 2004). (Appeal related to alleged takings by govenment officials of an adjoining landowner’s property for government use).

Perrone v. Mid-America Financial Investment Corp., No. A–03–177, 2004 WL 2032935 (Court of Appeals of Nebraska, Sept. 14, 2004). (Defended Landlord in Breach of Contract case and subsequent appeal).


Hirschbach Motor Lines, Inc. v. SmartTruck Undertray Sys., Inc., No. C17-1019-LTS, 2018 WL 283261 (N.D. Iowa Jan. 3, 2018). (Prosecution of breach of contract and warranty claims; pending).

Erickson v. U-Haul Intern., Inc., No. S–05–1163, 274 Neb. 236 (Supreme Court of Nebraska, Sept. 7, 2007). (Defense of trucking company related to failue to warn).




WordPress Theme built by Shufflehound. © 2019 Goosmann Law Firm