White Jankowski Lawyers

Our Approach



We believe the burden of proof rests on the party that wants to prevail.  Therefore, we always prepare to carry it.

Our approach to litigation begins with careful planning and preparation.  We explore all of the available evidence and carefully distill it into a focused presentation.  We interview witnesses, conduct historical research, and work with experts to analyze scientific and technical matters.  We screen out evidence that is tangential or cumulative so that our client’s story is clear and cohesive.  We actively prepare to mitigate unfavorable facts.

Once a case reaches trial, we listen.  We listen to our own witnesses and tailor our questions to ensure we present all of their best evidence.  We listen to opposing witnesses to exploit breaks in the script.  We develop targeted cross-examination to show the judge the holes in the opposing side’s theory.  Finally, we listen to the judge to track his or her interest in and understanding of the evidence.  By listening, we adapt our presentation to meet the challenges that arise in trial.


We do not hesitate to take cases to trial, but by the same token are quick to evaluate and recommend settlement under appropriate circumstances.  We have experience in multi-party negotiations both in parallel with and independent of litigation.  In the litigation context, negotiating positions are informed by the development of evidence and law for trial.  We use targeted motions and discovery to develop leverage at the negotiating table.  We also explore opportunities to create value for other parties without sacrifice by our clients.

Beginning in the late 2000s, White & Jankowski joined other lawyers, clients, and consultants in pursuing a new “way of doing business” on Colorado’s western slope.  Colorado had seen decades of litigation over transmountain diversion projects to move water from the Colorado River Basin to front range farms and municipalities.  With new projects proposed, the interested parties chose not to continue this pattern.  Instead, they engaged in years of facilitated multilateral dialogue to develop agreements to allow the projects to proceed with benefits for both the western and eastern slopes.  Perhaps most importantly, the agreements are structured to continue the new way of doing business for future projects.

There are many other examples of parties choosing to avoid litigation over water or natural resources.  This can be especially important in disputes between governmental entities, who often have overlapping constituencies.  We respect that litigation can be the last resort, and we bring our extensive experience in alternative dispute resolution to these situations.

Flexible Fee Arrangements

We understand that cost is often a critical factor in choosing attorneys and we work with our clients to develop plans that maximize the predicted return for their budget.  We have experience developing alternative fee arrangements to help our clients predict and control the costs of representation.