Litigator & Trial Practitioner – Denver, Telluride & the Western Slope of Colorado





phone icon(970) 626-5891
divider

We specialize in legal solutions throughout Colorado from Denver to Telluride.

Based in Ridgway, Colorado, in the San Juan Mountains, Sagal Law represents clients in matters pending throughout Colorado and beyond, using seasoned advocacy skills to help clients navigate through their particular legal issues and obtain successful outcomes.

Colorado Practice

Roger Sagal of Sagal Law, LLC., has been practicing law since 1995. Roger has extensive trial and appellate experience and has an excellent record of getting results for his clients.

Roger attended Tulane University in New Orleans for both his undergraduate studies, and then Tulane Law School, where he graduated with Magna Cum Laude and Order of the Coif honors in the top 10% of his class.

READ MORE

Legal Practice Areas

  • Business
  • Complex Commercial Litigation
  • Contracts and Business Formation
  • Natural Resources and Mining
  • Land Use
  • Real Estate
  • Construction
  • Insurance
  • Criminal Law
  • Civil Rights
  • Employment

Recent Posts

Facebook Posts

Ahmad Rahimi found guilty in the Southern District of NY. Another example of the civilian federal court system competently handling terrorism cases. Military Tribunals are not the answer. Americans are entitled to open criminal proceedings. ... See MoreSee Less

View on Facebook

In 2005 Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act , which prevents the victims of gun violence such as in yesterday's tragedy in Las Vegas from holding the manufacturers of military grade weapons responsible for their deaths under common law tort principles that have been part of our civil justice system since we were an English colony. The point of this law, and other state laws like it (including Colorado's), is to never allow a jury of peers to determine whether or not the manufacturers of military grade weaponry are responsible for designing and marketing weapons of warfare for civilian use when a civilian uses it.
The following is taken from that law:
Businesses in the United States that are engaged in
interstate and foreign commerce through the lawful design,
manufacture, marketing, distribution, importation, or sale to
the public of firearms or ammunition products that have been
shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce are
not, and should not, be liable for the harm caused by those
who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or
ammunition products that function as designed and intended.
* * *
Do gun deaths also occur with handguns? Yes. A lot of times. That doesn't mean that the right policy is to facilitate the ones who would illegally use them to get better weaponry. These guns are precision-made to kill as many people and as swiftly and as easily as possible. It is the desired outcome of their design. Yesterday, a 64 year old accountant living in a retirement community, who never served in the military, was able to manufacture a killing field using war machinery readily available and marketed to the public.
In what may be the most truly ironic part of this law, it does permit a victim from suing a gun manufacturer under a product liability theory; for example, if the gun's design causes it to malfunction and injure someone due to the malfunction. But if the gun works as advertised, we're on our own.
I think there is cause to be skeptical whether a government ban on the sale of military style of weaponry and ammunition would reduce gun violence. And I personally believe there is nowhere near the political will to amass the resources and effort it would require to effectively implement such a law so it has its desired effect. But this law is nothing more than a giveaway by our frightened elected representatives scared of the gun lobby.
There is a third co-equal branch of government.
Cigarette manufactures changed their behavior only when juries started judging them. This law blocks almost all attempts at judicial scrutiny.
... See MoreSee Less

View on Facebook

Trump and "obstruction of justice". Here is the language of the statute I believe would be applicable to Trump's discussions with Comey:

§ 1503. Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally
Currentness
(a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b). If the offense under this section occurs in connection with a trial of a criminal case, and the act in violation of this section involves the threat of physical force or physical force, the maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for the offense shall be the higher of that otherwise provided by law or the maximum term that could have been imposed for any offense charged in such case.

18 U.S.C.A. § 1503 (West)

Thus, based on Comey's testimony thus far, the operative language is whether Trump "corruptly...endeavor[ed] to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice..."
... See MoreSee Less

View on Facebook

mobile.nytimes.com/2017/02/19/us/politics/merrick-garland-supreme-court-obama-nominee.html ... See MoreSee Less

View on Facebook



separator