Mansfield_banner.jpg

Robert E. Mansfield

Robert Mansfield is an experienced trial lawyer who practices in the area of complex commercial litigation, eminent domain litigation, intellectual property litigation and real estate litigation. He aggressively litigates matters, while effectively communicating with clients and keeping in mind their business goals and objectives. Rob has extensive experience representing clients in general commercial litigation, eminent domain litigation, intellectual property litigation, class action litigation and unfair competition. He has tried in excess of 40 jury and bench trials in both state and federal courts throughout the United States. Rob has also argued many cases before the Utah Supreme Court and other appellate courts.

Education
University of Utah (J.D., 1992)
       Utah Law Review
University of Utah (B.A., With Honors, 1988)

Professional Recognition & Awards
The Best Lawyers in America
          Commercial Litigation, Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law, Intellectual Property
          Litigation, Mergers & Acquisitions Litigation (2007-2018)
          “Lawyer of the Year,” 2016, Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law

The Best Lawyers in America, Business Edition
          Intellectual Property Law (2012)

Super Lawyers

Professional Memberships and Activities
American Bar Association
Ethics and Discipline Committee, Utah Supreme Court
Model Utah Jury Instruction Review Committee
          Eminent Domain and Condemnation Law

Bar Admissions
Utah State Bar
United States Supreme Court
United States District Court, District of Utah
United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit

Community Involvement
Honorary Consul of the Republic of Korea, State of Utah
Univerity of Utah Presidents Club Committee, Chair
Utah Republican Party Elephant Club, Chair
Museum of Utah Art and History, Board Member and General Counsel
Guadalupe School, Board Member and General Counsel
S.J. Quinney College of Law, Alumni Board
Utah Presents, Board Member and Vice Chair

Other Professional Experience
Partner – Snell & Wilmer
Shareholder – Vancott Bagley Corwall & McCarthy

Military Service
United States Army (1981 - 1984)

Representative Matters
-       Jury trial for the owner of commercial land with a net recovery of $1.835 million, as opposed to Salt Lake City’s offer of $577,000.  The property owner appealed the verdict to the Utah Supreme Court, arguing that the City did not have eminent domain authority in this instance.  The City attempted to take 2.6 acres of property to exchange for other property needed by the City.  The Supreme Court reversed the trial court, holding that the take for exchange purposes was not authorized by the legislature, ordered that the property be returned to the landowner and remanded the case for a determination of damages.  Settlement was then reached in favor of the property owner for $1.8 million as a result of the unlawful take, with the property owner retaining all property (trial counsel, appellate counsel and settlement counsel)

-       Jury trial for a large petroleum company against the Utah Department of Transportation (“UDOT”) alleging damage to a pipeline caused during highway construction, but not discovered until several years after the fact, resulting in a judgment of nearly $2 million.  The judgment was appealed to the Utah Court of Appeals and subsequently affirmed (trial counsel and appellate counsel)

-       Jury trial for the owner of undeveloped commercial land for UDOT’s partial taking, resulting in a recovery of $2.48 million as opposed to the State’s offer of $330,000 (trial counsel)

-       Jury trial for the owner of undeveloped land for UDOT’s partial taking, resulting in a recovery of $1.85 million as opposed to the State’s offer of $400,000 (trial counsel)

-       Appeal on behalf of landowner in eminent domain case where UDOT claimed that the landowner had previously transferred all rights appurtenant to the property to UDOT.  The appellate court reversed the trial court and remanded the case for further proceedings.  UDOT subsequently abandoned its claim of a prior conveyance of appurtenant rights (trial counsel and appellate counsel)

-       Jury trial for group of investors alleging fraud, conversion and breaches of fiduciary duty against promoter and organizer, resulting in jury verdict of $1.7 million, an extinguishment of all of the promoter’s ownership in the company and a finding that punitive damages were warranted.  The matter was settled prior to the determination of the amount of punitive damages (trial counsel)

-       Jury trial for large insurance company, alleging breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty, seeking damages of $70 million.  The matter was settled after the second day of trial for a very insignificant sum (trial counsel)

-       Jury trial for the owner of a 50-acre undeveloped parcel of land for UDOT’s partial taking of 4 acres to construct a freeway interchange, resulting in a recovery of nearly $1 million as opposed to the State’s offer of $157,000.  Just one year before the date of take, the owner purchased the entire 50-acre parcel for only $1.5 million dollars (trial counsel)

-       Jury trial for the owner of undeveloped land for UDOT’s partial taking to construct a new freeway, resulting in a recovery of $5.5 million as opposed to the State’s offer of $1.9 million (trial counsel)