Representative Cases/Case Results

Mr. Jurdem has successfully represented many clients in trials involving all types of criminal charges and personal injuries. Learn more by reading our case results below:

Criminal Defense Case Results

Criminal Defense

Domestic Violence

Meints Acquitted

Burglary and Assault: On May 27, 2015, a Boulder jury came back NOT GUILTY on the FIVE CHARGES against firm client Zachary Meints. Over objection, the Judge allowed the prosecutor to tell the jury that Zach was a registered sex offender. The firm had been fighting this case since April, 2014. We litigated just under 50 motions, including nine motions addressing expert witness issues, challenging all aspects of the case. This was a complex case with DNA, Fingerprint and tool mark experts, and with approximately 250 exhibits put together by our incredible legal assistant. The court room was packed with Boulder police, deputy sheriffs and detectives for closing argument. They really wanted our client to go down. The client was on sex offender probation and was looking at a serious revocation.

The verdicts were as follows:

Attempt to influence a public servant- NOT GUILTY
False reporting to authorities - burglary March 23, 2014- NOT GUILTY
False reporting to authorities- stabbing March 31, 2014 - NOT GUILTY
False reporting to authorities - threatening letters March 31, 2014 - NOT GUILTY
False reporting to authorities- stabbing April 8, 2014- NOT GUILTY

Burglary and Assault: On November 12, 2014 a Boulder jury returned verdicts of "Not Guilty" on each and every one of six charges against the firm's client arising out of a domestic violence incident. Not guilty verdicts were returned on charges of First Degree Burglary, Second Degree Burglary, First Degree Criminal Trespass, Third Degree Assault, Menacing, and Harassment. As a result the client will be able to seal her record and continue her professional career.

Permanent Protection Order: On September 8, 2014 a Boulder judge awarded a substantial victory to the firm's client in contested Permanent Protection Order proceedings. After domestic violence/assault charges had been dismissed against the client in earlier proceedings, both the client and the former alleged victim sought a permanent protection order against the other. The court awarded the firm's client, previously a defendant in the criminal case, a permanent protection order against the alleged victim in that case and denied the alleged victim's request for a reciprocal order.

Third Degree Assault: On January 21, 2014 charges of Third-Degree Assault/domestic violence that were brought the previous September, 2013, were dismissed by the Boulder District Attorney. The incident involved a situation in which, after the client terminated their relationship, a former domestic partner brought criminal charges based on allegations that were eventually shown to be false. The client has now been able to seal the record of this incident.

Domestic Violence: In April of 2014, a client represented by the firm was charged with one felony and one misdemeanor as a result of an alleged domestic violence incident. After protracted investigation and months of negotiating complex legal issues with the District Attorney's Office, the firm obtained the dismissal of all charges against the client.

Domestic violence: A CU student represented by the firm was charged with a felony and several misdemeanors as a result of an alleged domestic violence incident. In addition to representing the student in court, the firm also advised and assisted him in disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Student Conduct office at the university. Due to the firm’s work on his behalf, the disciplinary proceeding was not pursued by the university. The student remains in good standing at CU.

Domestic violence: In September of 2013, a Boulder jury returned a verdict of "Not Guilty," resulting in a complete acquittal for a firm client charged with False Imprisonment as a crime of Domestic Violence. This verdict preserves the client’s right to own firearms, and allows him to have the record of the case sealed completely.

Domestic violence: On March 30, 2012, a firm client facing a mandatory prison sentence for domestic violence-related charges was completely exonerated. With a jury trial imminent, the Boulder District Attorney dismissed all charges against a Boulder woman charged with domestic violence. The felony charges involved retaliation against a victim/witness, harassment and violation of bond conditions, and carried a mandatory sentence to prison upon conviction. Our firm represented this client for 11 months through a difficult preliminary hearing and related pretrial proceedings. No reasonable settlement offers were made by the prosecutor and we were preparing for trial when the Boulder DA dismissed this case in its entirety.

Domestic violence: On December 19, 2011, the scheduled jury trial date, all charges were dismissed against our client, a CU student, facing five to 16 years mandatory prison as the result of a domestic violence assault incident involving his girlfriend. Our firm represented the client vigorously throughout the preliminary hearing, arraignment and motions hearings, and turned down plea bargains offered by the district attorney. This complete dismissal was the result of our steadfast defense.

Stalking: On November 14, 2011, our firm represented a young woman facing multiple felony charges, including stalking and first-degree criminal trespass, as the result of a domestic violence incident. Although the DA was allowed to introduce evidence of a prior domestic violence incident and fly in the unrelated prior victim from Florida, the jury failed to convict the client on any felony charges. The only count of conviction was the lowest level misdemeanor harassment charge, which the firm will appeal for the client.

Felony menacing with a gun: On November 8, 2011, the jury came back "not guilty," resulting in a complete acquittal when our firm went to trial for an oil company executive accused of felony menacing with a gun as the result of a domestic violence incident. The client's right to carry a concealed weapon has been restored and his guns were ordered returned to him by the court. The acquittal allows the client to seal his record and put this nearly catastrophic event in his life behind him.

Sex Crimes

Sexual assault: In April of 2014, Jurdem, LLC, successfully represented a client under investigation for sexual assault and domestic violence related offenses by the Boulder Police Department and Boulder District Attorney's Office, resulting in the government's decision not to file charges against the client.

Sexual assault: On August 21, 2013, a Boulder jury returned a verdict of "Not Guilty" against a firm client charged with sexual assault by the use of force and violence, a class three felony requiring registration and sentencing as a sex offender upon conviction. The case was fought hard by the Boulder DA, through various phases, including preliminary hearing, motions hearings and jury trial. Charges had been pending against the client for a terrifying nine months, which ended with his complete acquittal. All records of this case may now be sealed.

Sexual assault: On June 12, 2013, in another alleged sex crime, the firm won a huge victory for a man charged with sexual assault by the use of force and violence, a class three felony that would have required registration and sentencing as a sex offender. After various stages of aggressive litigation, the charges, initially filed on December 7, 2012, were completely dismissed with prejudice allowing the complete record of the case to be expunged.

Sex assault on a child: On September 25, 2012, a firm client facing life in prison for alleged sex offenses was completely exonerated. With trial underway and the jury selected, the Arapahoe County District Attorney dismissed 66 counts charging sex assault on a child (pattern) and aggravated incest against a firm client that had been falsely accused by his stepdaughter. Forty four of the charges resulting from a grand jury indictment carried a mandatory sentence of life in prison as a sex offender had the client been convicted. Our firm represented this client for 14 months through many difficult preliminary proceedings. Jury trial, which had been continued twice, commenced on September 21, 2012. All of the charges were dismissed on September 25, 2012 and the client, completely exonerated, walked out of the courtroom a free man.

Unlawful sexual contact by force: In August, 2010, Mr. Jurdem and attorney Lisa Wayne, President Elect of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, represented a young man facing mandatory life in prison as an alleged sex offender for unlawful sexual contact by force. After the close of evidence in the Breckenridge, Colorado trial, the jury returned a verdict of "not guilty" on all counts after only 20 minutes of deliberation.

Indecent exposure: On December 11, 2008, Mr. Jurdem's client, wrongfully charged as a sex offender with indecent exposure and disturbing the peace, was totally cleared when all charges against him were dismissed four days before jury trial was to commence in Jefferson County, Colorado.

Sexual assault on a child: In a June 2008 State Court prosecution in Eagle, Colorado, Mr. Jurdem joined with well-known Denver criminal defense attorney Lisa Wayne in defending a New Jersey man wrongly accused of sexual assault on a child (position of trust) and facing a mandatory imprisonment for no less than 10 years to life. Their client was acquitted and went home to New Jersey with his family.

Indecent exposure: In October 2007, Mr. Jurdem gained the jury trial acquittal of a Denver man wrongly charged as a sex offender with indecent exposure in Denver County Court.

Sexual assault on a child: In a July 2007 state court prosecution in Denver District Court Mr. Jurdem again joined with attorney Lisa Wayne in defending a Denver minister wrongly accused of sexual assault on a child (position of trust) and facing a mandatory sentence to prison of no less than 10 years to life. The jury was unable to reach a verdict and was declared deadlocked. Thereafter, this client received probation as a result of a favorable plea agreement.

Drug Charges

Federal drug crime: On May 6, 2011, the firm prevailed in a federal criminal drug case representing a client charged with violation of supervised release and facing 60 months in prison. After a full hearing, the client was returned to supervised release and no sentence to prison was imposed.

Drug conspiracy: In July 2006, Mr. Jurdem defended a young woman charged with conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine in the United States District Court in Denver. Mr. Jurdem's client was facing no less than 10 years to life imprisonment if convicted of this offense. Despite testimony from four alleged eyewitnesses and law enforcement videotape showing Mr. Jurdem's client involved in a cocaine transaction, the federal court jury was unable to reach a verdict and deadlocked. Thereafter, Mr. Jurdem was able to achieve a favorable plea agreement in which his client was released from custody shortly after trial.

Felony cocaine charges: In United States v. Defendant M.W., a major criminal drug prosecution in the United States District Court, Scott Jurdem's client, an alleged drug courier, was stopped in Denver International Airport holding a suitcase with in excess of 28 pounds of crack cocaine. The jury returned a verdict and acquitted Mr. Jurdem's client on all charges. Defendant M.W. had been facing a life sentence.


Harassment: On April 29, 2013, the firm obtained a rare First Amendment victory. The Boulder County Court issued an order dismissing all charges against a firm client charged with harassment after directing profanity at detention center officials following the arrest of a family member. In dismissing all charges the court agreed that the client's speech, involving profanity directed at law enforcement officers, was protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Boulder District Attorney initially appealed the dismissal but later dropped the appeal allowing all records of the incident to be sealed.

DUI and Traffic Offenses

Minor in Posession: In December of 2013, a client represented by the firm was charged with MIP and possession of a fake identification after being contacted at a local bar by two officers. The firm negotiated an outright dismissal of all charges based up the officers' illegal contact of the client without reasonable suspicion.

In March of 2014, Jurdem, LLC successfully litigated a medical issue related to a client's diagnosis of Type I Diabetes and the impact of that condition on a breath test, resulting in the return of his drive's license following an administrative hearing. The client's driver's license had been temporarily revoked following his participation in a breath test which resulted in a BAC of .246 and his arrest on suspicion of driving under the influence of alcohol.

Speeding: On October 17, 2012, the firm obtained a "not guilty" verdict in the trial of a four-point speeding ticket involving laser radar where there was no plea offer given by the city attorney. The client would have accepted a reduced offense as part of a plea bargain but the city attorney refused to negotiate. The firm obtained a complete dismissal of the court case resulting in no points being assessed against the client's driver's license.

Habitual traffic offender: On December 2, 2011, our firm represented a longtime Boulder resident facing habitual traffic offender charges for driving under revocation and failing to yield the right of way of a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Although our client was facing a mandatory 30 days in jail for driving under revocation due to a prior alcohol offense, and up to 18 months jail total, we were able to obtain a plea offer for him to a zero-point traffic violation, community service and a $35 fine. Due to this plea offer, this client's license was not subject to an additional suspension period and he did not have to serve any jail time.

Driving under the influence of drugs: In June of 2011, we defended a CU Student charged with driving under the influence of drugs (marijuana) and after extensive negotiation and litigation, the Deputy District Attorney agreed to a simple four-point careless driving, dismissing all other charges. Because of our work on the criminal case, CU Student Conduct proceedings, which had been initiated against this client, were dismissed.

Chemical test refusal: On May 11, 2011, the firm successfully represented a client charged with refusing to take a chemical test after a DUI stop and prevailed at the DMV hearing, avoiding a one-year mandatory revocation of this client's license. May was a huge month for driver's license revocation proceedings at the DMV and the firm successfully represented a second client charged by the Department of Revenue with refusing to take a chemical test after being arrested for DUI, avoiding a one-year mandatory revocation for this client as well.

Repeat drunk driving Also in May of 2011, the firm took the case of a repeat drunk driver to court and successfully contested the police officer's conduct in improperly stopping a vehicle, resulting in the complete dismissal of all DUI and related charges against this client despite a recorded blood alcohol content over .20.

DUI: In April of 2011, after extensive negotiation, the firm was able to obtain a "nonalcohol" resolution (plea to reckless driving) for a client originally charged with DUI and several other traffic violations.

DUI license revocation: On January 31, 2011, the firm successfully prevented the revocation of our client's driver's license despite a blood alcohol test that established a BAC of over four times the legal limit.

DUI: In 2010, Mr. Jurdem was able to achieve a "nonalcohol" resolution of charges of driving under the influence and reckless driving pending against a 19-year-old man arising from a rollover crash by a plea of guilty to a four-point careless driving charge.


Homicide/criminal enterprise: United States v. Defendant C.H. involved a federal criminal prosecution charging attorney Jurdem's and co-counsel Lisa Wayne's client with a murder in the course of a continuing criminal enterprise and also contained allegations that Defendant C.H. was involved in a conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine. Defendant C.H. was found not guilty and cleared of all charges in the murder/continuing criminal enterprise. He was convicted on lesser drug charges. We have been unable to identify any other defendant that has been completely acquitted of homicide/criminal enterprise charges in the United States District Court in Denver, Colorado.

First-degree murder: In January 2010, Mr. Jurdem commenced trial of a Denver man who had been incarcerated for almost 1 1/2 years awaiting trial on charges of first-degree murder. Although this client has been held without bond for almost 18 months, the Chief Denver District Attorney on the case simply "gave up," dismissing all charges against this firm's client after two days of jury selection.


Auto theft: In September of 2010, after rejecting several plea offers in a case involving allegations of motor vehicle theft, the firm obtained a complete dismissal of the charges against our client.

Personal Injury Case Results

Automobile Accidents

Rollover accident: On December 10, 2012, the firm obtained a $575,000 personal injury claim settlement for a 19-year-old man injured as a passenger in a rollover automobile accident in Westminster. Although the client owed approximately $104,000 to reimburse his health insurer for accident-related treatment, the firm was able to negotiate a 50 percent reduction of the insurer's claim, allowing the client to keep an extra $52,000 for himself.

Auto crash: On December 8, 2011, our firm won a major victory against State Farm in an auto crash case. Our clients were awarded a judgment in Jefferson County in Judge Berryhill's court for $940,483.The final State Farm offer before trial was only $127,681.90. Most of the Judgment belongs to a 7-year-old boy who sued through his parents for injuries he sustained in a collision on April 4, 2007. His parents were awarded about $132,255 of the total. Judge Berryhill immediately calculated the interest and entered judgment. Our clients will also be awarded their litigation costs and State Farm has indicated through counsel that they will be paying their policy limits of $975,000 before the end of the year. This recovery, nearly eight times the final amount offered by State Farm prior to trial, is consistent with this firm's winning record of results in personal injury trials against insurance companies.

Drunk driving collision: After commencing jury trial on October 19, 2009, on behalf of his client injured in a collision with a drunk driver, Mr. Jurdem received a settlement of $450,000; an amount substantially above State Farm's final pretrial offer.

Motorcycle accident: On April 29, 2009, Mr. Jurdem's client seriously injured in a motorcycle accident received a settlement valued at $850,000.

Car/truck accident: On March 5, 2009, Mr. Jurdem, having rejected a $300,000 settlement offer, obtained a personal injury verdict in an automobile/truck accident case for his seriously injured client from a Fort Collins, Colorado, jury valued at $2,602,294.90. This verdict was affirmed by a unanimous panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals and is valued at $2,700,000. The interest continues to accrue at the 2010 rate of $214.49/day. (The separate cost judgment, of $25,742.31, was also upheld by the Appellate Court.)

Auto accident: In Plaintiff J.W. v Linkous and Parker, a Boulder County jury on August 23, 2006, returned a verdict worth approximately $215,000 in favor of Mr. Jurdem's clients, the J.W. family. The State Farm Insurance Company had offered $31,500 to settle the auto claim in response to Mr. Jurdem's $50,000 policy limits demand. State Farm, as insurer of the defendant driver that caused the collision, paid out more than four times the insurance policy limits as a result of the jury's verdict following its failure to accept Mr. Jurdem's $50,000 insurance policy limits demand. State Farm paid the full value of the verdict and did not pursue an appeal.

Auto accident: In August 2006, a jury returned a verdict in excess of $210,000 in favor of Mr. Jurdem's clients. Prior to trial, the defendant's top offer was only $35,000, an amount Mr. Jurdem felt insufficient to compensate his client for the shoulder injury she received in the automobile collision caused by defendant's negligence.

Auto accident: On May 12, 2006, an Arapahoe County jury returned a verdict worth approximately $625,000 in favor of Mr. Jurdem's client. Mr. Jurdem's client was injured in an automobile collision when the defendant driver failed to yield the right of way and struck the vehicle the plaintiff was driving. The plaintiff claimed that a pre-existing benign cyst in her spinal area became symptomatic and was causing pain as a result of the collision. When the cyst was surgically removed her pain continued. Immediately prior to trial the defendant offered to settle for $55,000.

Car/horse collision: In Plaintiff M.B. v. Hart, an Adams County Jury on March 18, 2004, returned a verdict worth in excess of $475,000, in favor of attorney Jurdem's clients. Colorado Farm Bureau Insurance had offered only $12,500 to settle the claim brought by the family following a collision with the defendant's horse on a state highway. The jury found that the defendant was negligent in failing to keep the horse out of the roadway.

Motorcycle accident: In Plaintiff T.M. v. Miller Brands, Scott Jurdem and former partner Joe Branney represented a motorcyclist who had sustained a brain injury and other serious injuries when a Miller beer truck unlawfully took the right of way at an intersection in Denver, Colorado. A Denver jury awarded a verdict in excess of $2,000,000.

Rear-end collision: In Plaintiff D.A. v. Borquez Excavating, returned a verdict in the amount of $250,000 for Scott Jurdem's client who had been injured in a low-speed rear-end automobile collision. The case was subsequently settled for a higher amount, taking into account litigation expenses, interest and other considerations.

Products Liability/Defective Products

Defective ladder: In Plaintiff P. P. v. Krause, Inc., Scott Jurdem represented a man who had been injured after purchasing a ladder from the defendant for use in his business. When Plaintiff P. P. was on the ladder, the locking bolt on the right side of the middle hinge sheared off, throwing him to the ground. Defendant Krause, Inc. did not think the case had much value and made a final offer to settle in the amount of $5,000. A verdict was returned in the case in favor of Mr. Jurdem's client in the amount of $896,796.03 (including interest).

Defective bus door: In Plaintiff C. S. v. Thomas Built Buses, attorney Jurdem and partner Joe Branney represented an 11-year-old boy who had received severe facial injuries after being ejected through a defectively designed emergency exit door during a rollover accident involving the defendant's bus. The jury returned a verdict of $17.1 million in the boy's favor after a 10-day trial.

Premises Liability

Hand railing: In Plaintiff R. D. v. Pioneer General Insurance Company, Plaintiff R. D. fell from a second floor balcony onto concrete below when a 30-year-old hand railing gave way. Defendant Pioneer General initially offered only $5,000 to settle the case. A verdict was returned in favor of lawyer Jurdem's client in the amount of $1,070,000 plus statutory interest.

Unprotected guardrail: In Plaintiff D. S. v. Lynch Material Handling Company, lawyer Jurdem, along with partners Joe Branney and Neil Hillyard, represented a man whose arm had been severely cut by an extremely sharp and unprotected guardrail on a conveyor line at a beverage distribution plant. The jury awarded approximately $1.5 million.

Toxic Tort
North Boulder Neighbors win suit

Groundwater contamination: Mr. Jurdem served as lead counsel representing residents of a Boulder neighborhood in which groundwater had become contaminated as the result of a circuit board manufacturer releasing toxic waste into its septic system. In a trial of 10 representative neighbors, a $4.1 million verdict was returned in favor of Mr. Jurdem's clients. Later, judgment in excess of $13,000,000 was entered in favor of the entire homeowner group.

Toxic contamination: Scott Jurdem, Mr. Branney and other lawyers represented 21 Fort Collins families that experienced toxic contamination as the result of leaking underground gasoline tanks at a Diamond Shamrock station. The case settled successfully for a confidential amount after three weeks of trial.

Property contamination: In Plaintiff W. Corp. v. Texaco, lawyer Jurdem and former partner Joe Branney represented the W. Corporation in its claim against Texaco resulting from leaking underground gasoline storage tanks at a service station, which had contaminated property W. Corp. owned during the construction of its Riverfront Festival project. The judgment entered by the Court on the jury verdict in favor of Mr. Jurdem's clients, exceeded $1,000,000.

Medical Malpractice

Hospital malpractice: In Plaintiff L. v. Columbia-HealthONE d/b/a St. Luke's Medical Center, Scott Jurdem, along with co-counsel M. Susan Kudla, represented the wife of a 69-year-old man with cerebral palsy who had died as the result of improper care during a hospitalization. The jury returned a substantial verdict in favor of the plaintiff.


Murder: In Plaintiff R. v. William Street Center, Mr. Jurdem represented a mother and three children whose father had been murdered by an escapee from a Denver halfway house. Despite initially denying liability, the case settled for $1,000,000 after a one-week jury trial.

Bad Faith Insurance

Bad faith and breach of contract: In Plaintiff G. v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company, Mr. Jurdem represented a young woman and brought bad faith and breach of contract claims against her automobile insurance carrier for failure to pay reasonable and necessary benefits under Colorado's prior no-fault law. A substantial verdict was returned in favor of Plaintiff G. and against the insurance company.

Other Cases

Breach of contract: In Plaintiff S. v. McSparran, et al., Mr. Jurdem served as lead counsel for the four named defendants in a complex commercial case. The Plaintiff had charged Mr. Jurdem's clients with breaching fiduciary duties and violating an employment contract and was seeking in excess of $20,000,000. During trial, Mr. Jurdem's clients were vindicated by a favorable settlement for a confidential amount.

Corporate dispute: In January of 2011, the firm successfully litigated a corporate dispute, obtaining a preliminary injunction for this client prior to a favorable result in arbitration.

Fraud: In March of 2011, the firm successfully litigated allegations of fraud, obtaining a preliminary injunction for this client as well as the court-ordered return of fraudulently obtained real property.

Click Here For A Free Case Evaluation