Henry M. Baskerville

Bar / Professional Activity

• Chicago Bar Association, Lawyer-to-Lawyer Mentoring Program, Mentor
• Illinois
• U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (Trial Bar)
• U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
• American Bar Association
• Colorado
• U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois
• U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
• Colorado Bar Association, 2017
• U.S. District Court, District of Colorado
• U.S. District Court, Central District of Illinois

Verdicts / Settlements (Case Results)

• Represented dozens of clients in governmental investigations. 
• Conducted many internal investigations for companies concerned about malfeasance. 
• Represented a major infrastructure contractor in a qui tam claim related to numerous HUD projects. The matter settled favorably for the client the day before trial. 
• Represented a major defense contractor in a qui tam lawsuit and prevailed on summary judgment.  
• Represented claims brought by the U.S. Attorney’s office against a client caught on videotape allegedly paying a bribe to an undercover FBI agent to obtain a medical contract. The client was convicted after a two-week jury trial, but the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and ordered the client’s immediate release, finding that he had been entrapped as a matter of law and making new law on the entrapment defense.  
• Represented a client whose contract with the State of Colorado was terminated without due process. Obtained a TRO against the State from enforcing the termination, and the matter settled favorably thereafter. 
• Successfully defended claims brought against clients for breach of fiduciary duty and malicious prosecution, among others. After six days of arbitration—and my cross-examination of the claimant—the other side agreed to drop their claims and walk away to avoid paying our legal fees.  
• Successfully defended lawsuit brought against client for fraud and won countersuit for fraud and unjust enrichment after three-day bench trial. 
• Represented client in suit against him claiming fraud. After a week-long trial, the jury found unanimously in favor of client on fraud claims.  
• Represented client in suit alleging breach of fiduciary duty and breach of operating agreement. After a weeklong trial, the Court rejected all counterclaims and awarded client nearly $4.5 million, including post-judgement interest and attorney's fees. 
• Represented clients who were defrauded into selling their company for substantially less than it was worth. After a six-day trial, the jury ruled in favor of my client on all claims and rejected the defendants’ counterclaims.   
• Represented client filing suit against landlord for breaching the duty of good faith and fair dealing. After trial, the Court ruled in clients’ favor on all claims and denied all the landlord’s claims. Successfully defended the judgment on appeal, including a petition for certiorari to the Colorado Supreme Court.  
• Represented client in a dispute regarding a Processing Agreement, bringing arbitration against the counter party and its owner. After an eight-day arbitration hearing, the Arbitrator rejected all of the other side’s claims and awarded client the full damages sought, approximately $3 million, plus 100% of our legal fees.  
• Prosecuted claims on behalf of clients alleging that they had been defrauded out of company shares. Prevailed on all motions and obtained a highly favorable financial settlement in excess of $20 million. 
• After a six-day trial, secured judgment of over $50 million on behalf of clients for claims for breach of contract, civil theft, breach of fiduciary duty, and fraudulent inducement, among others.  
• Represented an acquiring company and its executives in a failed business merger of tech companies. After eight days of arbitration, the matter settled very favorably for the clients. 
• Represented client in suit for breach of contract, fraudulent transfers, and civil theft and in countersuit fighting claims of theft of trade secrets, COCCA claims, breach of fiduciary duty, and computer crimes. After an eleven-day trial, the Court ruled in favor of client on all claims and rejected all counterclaims, awarding approximately $12 million, plus 100% of legal fees. Successfully defended the judgment on appeal, and the judgment (including fees) was largely affirmed. 
• Honnen Equipment Co. v. Ultra Energy Solutions, Inc. and Eric Whitehead, Case No 2018 CV 30039.  I represented one of the defendants.  I was able to get the Plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss its claims against my client., 2018
• Represented, Pro Bono, Defendants in United States v. Patricia Ronan, et al., Case No. 12-cv-02395
• We Rock the Spectrum, LLC v. 5 hearts, LLC et al, Case No. 17-cv-03055. Represented Plaintiff, 2018
• Craig Brand, et al. v. Frank Geddes, et al., 2018 CV 30591.  I represented the Defendants.  Plaintiffs filed a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction.  The matter settled favorably for the client. , 2018
• Kenneth Tallman v. TTB Advisors, Inc., et al. Case No. 18 CV 30010.  I represented one of the Defendants.  After months of litigation, the Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his claims against my client. , 2018
• Prinster v. Mastodon Holdings, et al., 2016 CV 34363.  At the close of the Third-Party Plaintiff's Case at trial, the Court granted our Rule 41 motion to dismiss and entered judgment entered in favor of my client, the Third-Party Defendant, on Third-Party claims brought by Defendant, 2017
• We Rock the Spectrum, LLC v. MoppyHuse, LLC et al, Case No. 17-cv-03049. Represented Plaintiff, 2018
• American Builders & Contractors Supply Co., Inc. v. 1st Choice Roofing, Inc., et al., Case No. 2014 CV34549.  We represented the plaintiff.  After judgment and garnishment proceedings, the matter ultimately settled favorably for our client. , 2018
• Christopher Dickinson v. Emily Hoyt, et al.  Case No. 16-cv-69, Pending in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida.  I represented three of the seven defendants.  After years of litigation, the matter settled very favorably for my clients., 2018
• Better with Bacon, Inc. d/b/a BWBacon Group v. INEO, LLC.  Case No. 2018 CV 31166.  I represent the Plaintiff.  We obtained a judgment against the defendant and are pursuing collections., 2018
• Represented, Pro Bono, Plaintiff in Harper v. Dart, et al., Case No. 10-cv-3873
• Brooke v. Gateway Park Hotels LLC, 17-cv-02908.  Represented Defendant, 2018
• Dennis Hambley v. Kolbe Striping, et al., Case No. 2018 CV 30312.  I represented the Plaintiff.  After and serving the complaint, the matter settled favorably for my client., 2018

Special Licenses / Certifications

• Certificate in Trial Advocacy, Loyola University School of Law, 2005

Pro bono / Community Service

• Officer on the PTO for the French American School of Denver 
• Regularly gives back to the community by providing pro bono representation.
• Served on the Board of Directors of the Mile High Youth Corps and as a member of the Board’s Development Committee.

Honors

• Best Lawyers in America - Commercial Litigation, Best Lawyers, 2025
• Litigation Star, Benchmark Litigation, 2025
• Recipient of AV Preeminent rating from 2017 - present. , AV Preeminent Rating, Martindale-Hubbell, 2025
• The Litigation Counsel of America. A close-knit, peer-selected, and aggressively diverse honorary society of 3,500 of the best trial lawyers you will find anywhere. Less than one-half of one percent of American lawyers, vigorously vetted for skills, expertise, and service; an invitation-only collegial network of lawyers who effectively represent clients across North America and around the world., Litigation Counsel of America Fellow, https://www.litcounsel.org/, 2024
• Lead Counsel Verification in Civil Litigation, Lawinfo.com, a subsidiary of Thompson Reuters, 2024
• Best Lawyers in America, Best Lawyers, 2017
• “Rising Star”, Super Lawyers, Colorado, 2017
• Top 40 Under 40, National Trial Lawyers, 2014
• “Rising Star”, Super Lawyers, Illinois, 2012-2015

Educational Background

• Boston College, Honors: Cum Laude, 2001

Scholarly Lectures / Writings

• Featured in the Denver Business Journal article, "How Denver's Boutique Law Firms Compete as Larger Offices Merge.", Quoted, How Denver's Boutique Law Firms Compete as Larger Offices Merge, Denver Business Journal, 2025
• The DEA’s recent interim final rule–which appears to be in contravention of the letter and spirit of the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (aka the Farm Bill)–continues to cause concern and turmoil in the industry. The proposed rule addresses CBD and hemp manufacturing, and threatens to criminalize certain hemp derived cannabinoids, extracts and derivatives, and received over 3,300 comments during the public comment period. , Author, Synthetic vs. Natural Hemp: A Legal and Labeling Minefield, Cannabis Business Executive, 2020
• The DEA recently issued an interim final rule addressing the implementation of hemp provisions of the Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018 (aka the Farm Bill). But the rule has left many hemp companies confused and concerned. Specifically, the DEA seeks to criminalize certain cannabinoids in what appears to be a direct contravention of the letter and spirit of the Farm Bill. , Author, The DEA's New Interim Hemp Rule Has Left Many Companies Confused, Green Entrepreneur, 2020
• Investors in the CBD market are beginning to take a sharp look at the international arena as restrictions loosen and usage of CBD products grows in Europe, Latin America and beyond. As with all investments, there are risks to be considered when participating in the overseas cannabis market, along with the potential for generous returns. Because the industry is so new in most countries, the legalities can be fraught, with governing, banking and financing regulations not firmly in place., Author, Risks and Rewards of International CBD Markets, Cannabis Business Executive, 2020
• A new and notable change is on the cannabis horizon, and it will affect a wide swath of cannabis and CBD products. Beginning January 3, 2021, the sweeping labeling requirements of California’s Proposition 65 will apply more broadly to cannabis and CBD products., Author, What You Need To Know About Changes To California's Prop 65, Green Entrepreneur, 2020
• The pandemic has affected every industry in the U.S., some worse than others, and the cannabis industry has not been immune. Unfortunately, some cannabis companies seeking justice in court could face such long delays that they may never get resolution., Author, Justice For All? How COVID-19 Is Affecting Litigation in the Cannabis Industry, Green Entrepreneur, 2020
• It would be an understatement to say that M&A activity was robust in Colorado’s cannabis marketplace last year, especially concerning the state’s dispensaries and cultivators. Can we expect the same kind of frenzied activity in this sector again this year?, Author, For Colorado’s cannabis companies, more M&A?, Denver Business Journal, 2020
• Colorado’s hemp growers are about to get a lot more competition now that the USDA has begun promulgating its plan for national hemp production. Under the department’s so-called interim final rule, hemp growers across the country now have a lot more legal and practical guidance on everything from THC testing and crop disposal to insurance requirements and criminal background checks., Author, Colorado hemp growers should pay attention to new USDA rules, Denver Business Journal, 2020
• Business partnerships often are compared to marriages – for good reason. Both begin in heady, if not heartfelt, optimism. Both take a lot of hard work to succeed. And both, unfortunately, face steep odds for long-term success. In fact, while as many as 50% of marriages will end in divorce, some 70% of business partnerships similarly will fail., Author, When the Magic Fades: Avoiding a Bad Canna-Business Breakup, Cannabis Business Executive, 2020
• How crucial are supply-chain protections? The answer could be traced to the ongoing vaping crisis. The current public-health emergency has killed at least a dozen people and has hospitalized hundreds more. Aside from the human cost, the tragedy has also raised questions about many aspects of vaping, including its meteoric rise in popularity with young people, its lack of regulatory oversight, and its profitable existence in illicit markets. More importantly, for any business in any industry, this crisis also highlights the need for ensuring the integrity of supply chains., Author, What The Vaping Crisis Teaches Businesses About The Importance Of Supply Chains, Green Entrepreneur, Cannabis, 2019
• The dominant sales channel for CBD – e-commerce – is becoming a major draw for marijuana manufacturers, who are using hemp-derived CBD to tap into new revenue and a wider consumer base. They’re doing this despite repeated warnings from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that it is illegal to include CBD in food, cosmetics or dietary supplements., Interview subject, Marijuana manufacturers flock to CBD e-commerce amid ongoing legal confusion, Hemp Industry Daily, Cannabis, 2019
• When Bruce Linton, the co-CEO Canopy Growth -- the world’s largest cannabis company -- was forced out this summer, his departure raised the profile of a common business contract used extensively in today’s cannabis industry -- the non-complete clause.  There's been much speculation about where Linton will land next, given that his non-compete contractually bars him from working in Canadian markets but not in the U.S. Non-compete contracts like Linton's are common in business. Companies need to protect what goes on inside the walls of their boardrooms, warehouses and retail outlets. And non-compete clauses are a way to accomplish this. But despite the legal restrictions, talented workers naturally, and often unintentionally, take with them the knowledge they acquired in one job to other jobs. And not just C-level business leaders, but talent of any kind is a valuable commodity for the ever-increasing number of cannabis start-ups and expansions taking place today., Author, How Enforcable Is Your Non-Compete Clause?, Green Entrepreneur, Cannabis, 2019
• For most CBD companies, passage of the 2018 Farm Bill in December seemed like a good thing. Popular consensus held the Food and Drug Administration soon would clarify its stance on cannabidiol, paving the way for sensible regulations. Unfortunately, it appears the FDA’s duck, dodge, and deflect strategy persists. Here’s all we know right now: Hemp-derived CBD is federally legal so long as the THC content is below 0.3 percent by dry weight. The FDA held a public hearing May 31 “to obtain scientific data and information about the safety, manufacturing, product quality, marketing, labeling, and sale of products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds.” The agency also established an online process to collect public comment through July 2. While the measures represent a good start and the FDA has indicated it will move as quickly as possible to issue guidance, the agency also warned the process of creating a pathway to approval for health-and-wellness products could take years. The uncertainty is maddening for companies that must assess their risk as they move forward with product development and marketing., Interview subject, CBD & FDA: Plenty of Questions, Few Answers, CBD Today, Cannabis, 2019
• On February 17, 2016, a Federal District Judge in Colorado issued an important ruling for marijuana businesses.  Specifically, in The Green Earth Wellness Center, LLC v. Atain Specialty Insurance Company, the Court ruled that marijuana can be covered by insurance despite the fact that it is illegal under Federal law.  Perhaps more importantly, the Court ruled that while the harvested marijuana was covered by Green Earth’s insurance policy, the growing crop, the mother plants, and the clones, were not.  , Author, Important Ruling for Marijuana Businesses, LinkedIn, Cannabis, 2016
• "Important Ruling for Marijuana Businesses," LinkedIn Author, March 2016
• Restrictive covenants are common in employment contracts. But courts have long held that competition is “the central nervous system of the economy.” United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150, 226, n. 59 (1940). Consequently, depending on the state in which the company is located (or the state law chosen by the terms of the contract), Courts frequently deem restrictive covenants unenforceable. To avoid this result, companies should take care in drafting their restrictive covenants to protect only what is most important to the company, November, Author, Non-Compete Clauses in Employment Contracts: How to Avoid Having Them Deemed Unenforceable, an ExecSense eBook, 2012
• "CFPB Rules Proposal May Drastically Impact School Arbitration Agreements," Career Education Review, Co-Author, December 2015, CFPB Rules Proposal May Drastically Impact School Arbitration Agreement, Career Education Revie, 2015

• Cannabis
• Tech