Krista Vivian Nash

Krista Vivian Nash

2.3
Rating: 6.2

Licensed for 11 years

Family Lawyer at Arvada, CO
Practice Areas: Family

5610 Ward Rd Ste 300, Arvada, CO

About Krista

Biography

Practice Areas

1

Practice Area

Family 100%

When representing a parent, we continuously counsel our clients to choose the path that is right, that brings peace, that lessens conflict and holds what is left of your co-parenting relationship together. We prefer to earn less money but increase t

100%

Fees and Rates

We have not found any cost information for this lawyer


Looking for an attorney? Avvo can help.

search module image

Search our directory

Quickly connect with top attorneys through our legal directory to get help with your legal issue.

chat module image

Avvo's live chat agents can help coordinate a consultation with a local attorney.

Chat with a live agent who can match you with the right attorney for your legal needs.

Chat with

Licenses

Licensed in Wyoming for 7 years

State: Wyoming

Acquired: 2018

Active

No misconduct found

Licensed in Colorado for 11 years

State: Colorado

Acquired: 2015

Active

No misconduct found

Location

Krista Nash

5610 Ward Rd Ste 300, Arvada, CO, 80002-1309

Nash Family Law PC

5610 Ward Rd Ste 300, Arvada, CO, 80002-1309

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

Krista Vivian Nash's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

2.3 /5.0

9 Client Reviews

Filter Avvo Reviews (9) Refine reviews to match your needs. Use the filters to quickly surface reviews that align with your case or priorities.

Showing 1 - 5 of 9 reviews

Posted by lisa | July 21, 2026 | Hired Attorney

Extremely concerning conduct

I would never recommend Krista Nash as a Child's Legal Representative. Everything I write here is based on filings in my own case, billing records, recordings, and my personal experience. I also know multiple other Boulder County parents who have described the same pattern of behaviour. One of my b...iggest concerns was that Ms. Nash billed thousands of dollars preparing a Magistrate Review that could never even be considered by the District Court because it was filed incorrectly. Either she didn't know the review could not legally be considered, or she did know and billed for it anyway. I honestly don't know which explanation is worse. That same review correctly explained why reunification therapy in my case would violate Kayden's Law. She got that absolutely right. Then, almost unbelievably, she recommended what she called "family systems therapy" with Dr. Lynn Steinberg. Yes, that Lynn Steinberg. The same Dr. Steinberg whose work has become nationally known through the Maya and Sebastian case. The same Dr. Steinberg whose own website advertises: "One Family at a Time Reunification Program – A four-day program with the goal of reunifying children with their Alienated Parent." Calling it "family systems therapy" didn't change what it was. Fortunately, my son knew his rights. He insisted he did not have to work with Dr. Steinberg unless a judge specifically ordered him to. There was no such order. Ms. Nash also recommended that my only parenting time be supervised visits costing between $300 and $420 every week. At exactly the same time, she was telling the court that the previous order removing my son from my care should effectively be 100% reversed because current law and my son's best interests supported him returning to me. Those two recommendations simply do not make sense together. This is not a Child First approach. If a child should be returned to a parent immediately, why recommend parenting time that is so financially prohibitive it effectively terminates that parent's relationship with their child? The District Court ultimately agreed there were serious problems with the order. My Magistrate Review resulted in the case being remanded because there were insufficient best-interest findings supporting my son's relocation and no findings whatsoever supporting the effective reduction of my parenting time through financially impossible supervision costs. Those are matters of public record. The billing also raised serious concerns for me. Bills were re-issued after significant edits. There were vague entries amounting to thousands of dollars, what appeared to be duplicate billing, and recommendations that seemed internally contradictory. Over time I began to feel that the recommendations shifted depending on what kept the case alive, rather than what actually resolved it for the child. Sadly, I have since heard almost identical experiences from numerous other parents in Boulder County. The consistent theme is that Ms. Nash appears to tell each side what they want to hear while the litigation continues month after month, leaving children caught in the middle while parents spend tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars. That is, of course, my opinion based on my experience and the stories shared with me by other families. But when you hear the same pattern over and over again, it becomes difficult to ignore. Perhaps the most upsetting part was my son repeatedly reaching out to her while he was in genuine distress. I have recordings he made of those conversations. My experience was that she often told him one thing, told me something completely different, and then billed for every interaction. When my son was finally returned to my care, Ms. Nash tried to take credit for that outcome. My own experience was very different. It felt as though my son was the one who protected himself by knowing his rights and refusing to participate in a programme that had never actually been ordered by the court.

Krista Nash

Replied last July 24, 2026

Because this review concerns a specific court case involving a child, I will not publicly disclose the child’s private circumstances or attempt to retry the case in a review. I do, however, strongly disagree with this characterization of my work. A Child’s Legal Representative does not control the orders entered before the CLR is appointed, nor does the CLR represent either parent or the child directly. In some cases, a CLR enters litigation only after substantial judicial findings, procedural decisions, and litigation strategies (and perhaps errors by parents' counsel) have already shaped the child’s circumstances. At that point, the CLR must work within a complicated legal and procedural posture, evaluate the child’s immediate needs, preserve appropriate legal issues, and attempt to correct or mitigate problems that may have arisen before the CLR ever became involved. I take Kayden’s Law and the safety concerns it addresses extremely seriously. Applying that law in an active case is not always as simple as attaching a label to a particular service or filing. Family law cases frequently involve difficult choice-of-law questions, procedural limitations, existing court orders, disputed facts, and the need to create a careful record so that the court can properly consider the child’s circumstances in both current and upcoming decisions. The assertion that legal work was “filed incorrectly” or “could never be considered” reflects a litigant’s legal conclusion, not an established fact. Parents understandably view litigation through the lens of their own experience and desired outcome, but they do not always have the legal training or the full information necessary to assess why a particular argument was raised, how an issue was preserved, or how a filing could affect later proceedings. Strategic legal decisions are often made not only for the immediate ruling, but also to educate the court, preserve error, correct an incomplete record, and improve future outcomes for the child. Similarly, recommendations made at different stages of a case are not necessarily inconsistent. A child may require a cautious interim structure while the CLR simultaneously works toward a substantially different long-term outcome. That is not “playing both sides.” It is the careful, evolving work required in a complex child-centered case. It is also not unusual in this work for a parent to express deep gratitude when progress is made and later criticize the same professional when individual recommendations, fees, or aspects of the process are not to that parent’s liking. That tension is inherent in a role that is independent of both parents. I stand firmly behind the work I performed in this matter. My decisions were made carefully, strategically, and in good faith, with the child’s welfare as the governing concern. Over more than a decade and approximately 100s of CLR appointments, I have taken that responsibility extremely seriously, even when doing so has required difficult recommendations, extensive legal work, or positions that neither parent fully welcomed.

Posted by anonymous | June 14, 2026 | Hired Attorney

The "Queen of Podcasts" abandons high-conflict families when real work is required

Krista Nash is highly skilled at marketing herself. While she talks a great game on her family law podcast and frequently name-drops her Northwestern education, her actual performance as a PC/DM is a profound disappointment. She presents herself as a tough, fast-acting advocate for children, but wh...en it comes to rolling up her sleeves in a high-conflict environment, she becomes skittish and overwhelmed. After accepting our case, she neglected the mandate for months. Her failure to act left our children stranded without necessary decisions. She eventually quit and chose to reimburse some of her bills rather than face the consequences of her inactions. Her operational setup is also problematic. She runs a highly expensive, antiquated operation, using multiple paralegals that create a 25% markup of duplicate effort that could easily be streamlined by AI today. If you need a PC/DM who prioritizes real children over her podcast audience, look elsewhere.

Krista Nash

Replied last June 24, 2026

Thank you for sharing your perspective. Because of my professional obligations, I cannot discuss the details of any individual matter in a public forum. What I can say is that cases involving high conflict, particularly when children are involved, often present challenges and circumstances that are not visible to outside observers. My commitment in every role—including as a Parenting Coordinator/Decision-Maker—is to act ethically, professionally, and in accordance with the scope of the appointment and applicable standards. When circumstances arise that prevent me from continuing in a matter, I take appropriate steps to address those issues responsibly and professionally. I recognize that not every participant in a family law case will agree with my decisions, recommendations, timing, or approach. However, I remain committed to serving children and families with integrity, diligence, and care. I wish you and your family the best moving forward.

Posted by Cheryl | March 11, 2026 | Hired Attorney

Excellent-No BS Child Advocacy Lawyer!!!!

I’m extremely grateful for the support and professionalism Krista provided throughout my case. From the very beginning, she took the time to listen to my concerns, explain the legal process clearly, and make sure I felt informed at every step. She was responsive, detail-oriented, and always prepar...ed. I truly felt like she was advocating for me and my childs best interests while also keeping the process as smooth and efficient as possible. She was very upfront about what separating my emotions from the reality of my situation- which was paramount on how my child's safety was ultimately safeguarded. With her unwavering consistency, I was able to navigate a very difficult time with confidence. I highly recommend her services to anyone who needs a compassionate, skilled, and unbelievably knowledgeble divorce attorney.

Krista Nash

Replied last March 12, 2026

Thank you for this wonderful review. It was a privilege to work with you .

Posted by Rochelle | March 05, 2026 | Hired Attorney

Passionate and Professional

Krista has been my attorney and trusted advisor for 6 years. Her work in child advocacy both professionally and in the community made her an obvious choice for my complicated and contentious case. She is never afraid to speak the truth and passionately advocates for my children. Through her work, ...they have remained safe and now thrive.

Krista Nash

Replied last March 10, 2026

Thank you for this lovely review. It's been an honor to represent you!

Posted by anonymous | January 29, 2026 | Hired Attorney

Zero Stars

Unprofessional and deeply disappointing. She arrived late, billed excessively, and admitted she had not reviewed my case while pressuring me to fire my attorney. She refused to review evidence, showed clear bias without factual basis, caused unnecessary delays, and then blamed others for those delays.... Her actions contributed to nearly a year of avoidable court postponements while fees continued to accrue. I would not recommend her services especially where child safety is concerned.

Krista Nash

Replied last March 05, 2026

Because this review is anonymous, I cannot confirm whether the reviewer was ever a client or party in a case involving my firm. What I can say is that the statements in this review do not accurately reflect my practice or professional conduct. Ethical rules prevent me from discussing the details of any specific matter in a public forum. I take my responsibilities to children and families very seriously and work diligently to prepare for every case and advocate for child-centered outcomes. For those seeking a broader picture of client experiences with my firm, I encourage prospective clients to review the more than 100 five-star client reviews on Google from individuals who have worked directly with us.

See All Client Reviews

Krista Vivian Nash's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse Krista

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't received any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

No Endorsement Data Available Yet
This attorney hasn't created any attorney endorsements recently on Avvo.

Experience

Rating:  6.2 (Good)

Avvo Rating

Our Rating is calculated using information the lawyer has included on their profile in addition to the information we collect from state bar associations and other organizations that license legal professionals. Attorneys who claim their profiles and provide Avvo with more information tend to have a higher rating than those who do not.

What determines Avvo Rating?
  • Experience & background Years licensed, work experience, education
  • Legal community recognition Peer endorsements, associations, awards
  • Legal thought leadership Publications, speaking engagements
  • Discipline Disciplinary information may not be comprehensive, or updated. We recommend that you always check a lawyer's disciplinary status with their respective state bar association before hiring them.
Avvo Rating Levels
10.0 - 9.0 Superb8.9 - 8.0 Excellent7.9 - 7.0 Very Good6.9 - 6.0 Good5.9 - 5.0 Average4.9 - 4.0 Concern3.9 - 3.0 Caution2.9 - 2.0 Strong Caution1.9 - 1.0 Extreme Caution