« Back to ResultsShow More
Sarah Gohmann Bigelow
Top Rated Business Litigation Attorney in Seattle, WA
Selected to Rising Stars: 2013 - 2016
Licensed in Washington Since: 2011
Practice Areas: Business Litigation, Employment Litigation: Defense, Intellectual Property Litigation
Sarah’s experience extends to a variety of complex commercial litigation matters in both state and federal court and class action defense. Sarah is a graduate of the University of Michigan and the UCLA School of Law, where she served as the symposium editor of the UCLA Law Review and articles editor for the UCLA Women’s Law Journal. Before joining Savitt Bruce & Willey, Sarah practiced at Bryan Cave LLP in Los Angeles and served as law clerk to the Honorable Thomas B. Donovan of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. In addition to the law, Sarah has a passion for traveling, camping, cooking, and vegetable gardening.
About Sarah Gohmann Bigelow
First Admitted: 2006, California
Professional Webpage: http://sbwllp.com/our-lawyers/sarah-gohmann-bigelow/
- Lexis Nexis Practice Guide: Washington Contract Litigation, Contributor (LexisNexis/Matthew Bender 2015)
- Washington State Bar Association
- Federal Bar Association of the Western District of Washington
- NuOz Online LLC v. InSpa Corp. Defended claims for breach of contract relating to technology services; obtained favorable settlement.
- Valley Medical Center Governance Issues. Undertook detailed analysis of possible conflicts issues for publicly-owned hospital, and prepared a conflict of interest policy for the Valley Medical Center Board of Trustees.
- Moomjy v. HQ Sustainable Maritime Inc., et al. Defended class action against public offering underwriters alleging claims under sections 11 and 12 of Securities Act; brought motion to dismiss and then obtained favorable settlement dismissing all claims against clients without any payment on claims.
- ChemPoint v. Xenon Arc Inc., et al. Defended technology startup and its founders against claims for misappropriation of trade secrets, usurpation of corporate opportunity and breach of fiduciary duty; obtained ruling entitling clients to indemnification from plaintiffs for attorneys’ fees incurred, partial summary judgment rulings, and then favorable settlement.
Last Updated: 5/15/2022