David Christopher Spellman

David Christopher Spellman

5.0
Rating: 9.3

Licensed for 39 years

Litigation Lawyer at Seattle, WA
Practice Areas: Litigation, Intellectual Property, Business

1420 Fifth Ave, Suite 4100, Seattle, WA

About David

Biography

Practice Areas

3

Practice Areas

Litigation 40%

Litigation and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

40%
Business 30%

Business planning and counseling

30%
Intellectual Property 30%

Intellectual property counseling and litigation

30%

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 Washington for 39 years

State: Washington

Acquired: 1986

Active

No misconduct found

Location

Lane Powell

1420 Fifth Ave, Suite 4100, Seattle, WA, 98101-2375

Ad

Transform legal challenges into solutions.

Connect now to review your situation.

The Avvo Rating explained

display-bg

The Avvo Rating explained

David Christopher Spellman's Reviews

Avvo Review Score

5.0 /5.0

3 Client Reviews

David Christopher Spellman's Lawyer Endorsements

Endorse David
Howard Robert Roitman headshot
Howard Roitman

Commercial real estate lawyer | Oct 27

Relationship: Other

"I endorse this lawyer."

View All Endorsements

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

Experience

Rating:  9.3 (Superb)

Honors

2015

AV 5.0 out of 5.0, Martindale-Hubbell

2010

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2010

Top Lawyer, Intellectual Property, Seattle Metropolitan Magazine

2009

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2008

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2007

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2006

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2005

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2004

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2003

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

2002

AV Rated, Martindale-Hubbell

1985

Editor, American Criminal Law Review

Work Experience

1985 - Present

Shareholder, Lane Powell PC

Associations

American Bar Association

Member

American Intellectual Property Law Association

Member

King County Bar Association

Member

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Member

U.S. District Court for Eastern District of Washington

Member

U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington

Member

U.S. Federal Court

Member

Washington State Bar Association

Member

Sample of Legal Cases

Enters. Int’l Inc. v. Int’l Knife & Saw, Inc., Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 30,641 (W.D. Wash. July 24, 2014)

Partial Dismissal

Gig Harbor Family Trust v. Columbia Valuation Group, Inc., No. 13-2-04399-8 (King Cnty. Superior Ct. 2014)

Defense Verdict

Humphrey Indus., Ltd. v. Clay St. Assocs., LLC, 295 P.3d 231 (Wash. 2013)

Reversal

Shepler Constr. v. Leonard, 175 Wn. App. 239 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013)

Reversal

Evergreen Safety Council v. RSA Network, Inc., 697 F.3d 1221 (9th Cir. 2012)

Affirmed on appeal

Humphrey Indus., Ltd. v. Clay Str. Assocs., LLC., 242 P.3d 846 (Wn. 2010)

Prevailed on appeal of an award of fees

Seattle-Tacoma Int'l Taxi Ass'n v. Port of Seattle, 2010 WL 2283621 (Wash. Ct. App. Jun. 7, 2010)

Affirming denial of injunction.

Davis v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg., 2007 WL 2039077 (Wn. App. Div. 2 Jul. 17, 2007)

Affirming dismissal

Compana LLC v. Aetna, Inc., No. C05-0277L, 2006 WL 829111 (W.D. Wash. Mar. 27, 2006)

Denial of summary judgment on some claims

Geo Exchange Sys., LLC v. Total Energy Concepts, Inc., 115 Wn. App. 625, 65 P.3d 11 (2003)

Prevailed on appeal

Shell v. Lindal Cedar Homes, No. 2:02-mc-0064-TSZ (2002)

Judgment for claimant

Tube Art Displays, Inc. v. Health & Co., No. 2:98-cv-00112-TSZ (1998)

Injunction

Canyons Restaurant and Tap Room, Inc. v. Canyon Cafes Inc., No. 2:97-cv-01787-JCC (1997)

Injunction

InstruMed Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, No. 2:95-cv-01690 (1995)

Jury verdict

Richards v. Brown, 157 Wn. App. 803, 239 P.3d 602 (2010)

Affirmed on appeal.

See More Legal Cases

Education

1985

Georgetown University Law Center

N/A

Seattle University

Speaking Engagements

2004

CLE

Corporate Trade Secret Protection in Washington (co-author and speaker)

2000

Fifth Annual Intellectual Property Institute at 2-1

Competing for Talent and Protecting Business Value: Non-Compete Agreements and Trade Secret Law in Washington,”

Publications

2014

2 Washington Civil Procedure Deskbook at 52-1, WSBA, Co-author “Rule 52: Decisions, Findings and Conclusions,”

2014

Washington State Bar Association’s Construction Law Newsletter, “Design Professional Liens Attached When Nothing Is Built: Answering the Devil’s Advocate,”

2014

Issues and Answers magazine, Washington Bankers Association, Reviving Construction Projects — How to Avoid Creating a Frankenstein Monster”

2014

Lane Powell Legal Update “Your Proposal May Be Accessible to Your Competitors: Safeguard Trade Secrets in Government Procurement,”

2007

Washington Consumer Protection, Antitrust and Unfair Business Practices Law Developments (Third), WSBA 2007 Supplement to Restraint of Trade

2006

2 Washington Civil Procedure Deskbook (Second) at 52-1 (WSBA) Co-author, Supplement to "Rule 52: Decisions, Findings and Conclusions”

2002

Antitrust, Consumer Protection and Unfair Business Practices No. 21 Premature Post-mortem for the Implied Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing in Washington Contract Law (co-author)

2001

Washington Consumer Protection, Antitrust and Unfair Business Practices Law Developments (Third) (WSBA) “Restraints of Trade”

2001

Washington Consumer Protection, Antitrust and Unfair Business Practices Law Developments Antitrust and Unfair Competition Issues Involving Intellectual Property
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