Mr. Rosenberg is a shareholder at Lee Smart, who concentrates his practice primarily on defense of claims involving professional liability, construction litigation, general liability, and federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, both in the trial courts and courts of appeals. He has received an “AV” rating from Martindale-Hubbell Law Directory, which is its highest rating.

After attending Arizona State University, Mr. Rosenberg graduated cum laude from the University Of Miami School Of Law in December 2000, and has worked at Lee Smart since 2001. Mr. Rosenberg is currently licensed to practice law in all courts in the State of Washington, the United States District Courts in the Western District and Eastern District of Washington, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and in the United States Supreme Court. Mr. Rosenberg is a member of the American Bar Association and Washington State Bar Association, has authored published articles, and been named a Rising Star by Washington Law & Politics magazine.

Representative Cases

State Cases

• Brown v. TCI - Defense of negligence claim against a telecommunications company. Employee of contractor sued TCI when shocked by power line while repairing cable. Dismissed on summary judgment. No appeal filed.
• Henley v. Archdiocese of Seattle - Defense of negligence claim against school by student who sustained an injury during a ball game. Student alleged negligent supervision and failure to provide appropriate equipment. Dismissed on summary judgment. Affirmed on appeal.
• In re Ang - Assisted in defense of legal malpractice action. Defendant/a ttorney represented plaintiff in federal criminal indictment. Plaintiff claimed defense attorney coerced a guilty plea. Underlying trial court allowed plaintiff to withdraw the plea and later acquitted the plaintiff of all charges. Defense verdict in malpractice case. Affirmed on appeal, and affirmed by the Washington Supreme Court in 154 Wn.2d 477; 114 P.3d 637 (creating new Washington law regarding the burden of proof in a criminal malpractice case)
• In re Dalquist - Defense of an attorney in a purported class action brought to vacate judgments filed in hundreds of case, challenging jurisdiction of the court to enter the judgments and in which plaintiffs sought to vacate judgments for insufficient documentary support. Dismissed on summary judgment. Rule 11 fees assessed against plaintiffs' counsel. Affirmed on appeal.
• In re Hanson - Assisted defense of escrow agent in professional malpractice action. Escrow agent was attorney for buyer of property. Seller refused to finalize sale and was sued for specific performance. After losing underlying lawsuit, seller sued escrow agent. Dismissed on summary judgment. No appeal filed.
• In re Singleton - Defense of legal malpractice action. Attorney represented plaintiff in criminal action, which resolved in plea agreement. Plaintiff brought a personal restraint petition and was released early. He filed the malpractice action alleging that he had served too long in prison as a result of attorney's errors during the plea hearing and sentencing. Dismissed on summary judgment. No appeal filed.
• Johnson v. Horizons West Development, Inc., - Defense of negligence claim against general contractor for a trip and fall at a community clubhouse pool patio by a resident. Dismissed on summary judgment. No appeal filed.
• McSydnic v. Blank – Defense of claims of fraud, negligence, misrepresentation, and breach of contract. Plaintiff purchased apartment building from client and, several years later, discovered widespread problems with mold and the plumbing system. Dismissed on summary judgment where plaintiff failed to present evidence to show client had actual knowledge of the alleged defects, and plaintiff had accepted the risk of loss based on the "As Is" provision of the contract. No appeal filed.
• Milam v. Pioneer Human Services – Defense of negligence action against halfway house. Plaintiff was the Estate of a resident of a halfway house that had snuck out of a halfway house at night and was found shot to death the next morning. Dismissed on summary judgment. No appeal filed.
• Timson v. Pierce County FPD - Assisted by briefing in defense of a fire protection district against claims of negligence during a rescue operation following a motor vehicle accident. The action was dismissed on summary judgment. Dismissal affirmed, 136 Wn. App. 376, 149 P.3d 427 (2006).
• Weaver v. Paras – Defense of general contractor in negligence action. Plaintiff was delivery person injured when an electric bay door at a factory came down on her back when she was loading a truck. Claims against general contractor were dismissed on summary judgment. Claims against the property owner and electric subcontractor remained for trial. No appeal filed.

Federal Court :

• In re Cadet - Subrogation action on behalf of insurance carrier. Insurance carrier brought action against Cadet Manufacturing Company after company's heater caused fire in shopping center causing damage to carrier's insured tenants. Judgment was entered against Cadet in the amount of approximately $260,000.00.
• In re Cook – Defense of attorney in federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and Washington's Consumer Protection Act (CPA) claims. Attorney represented prevailing landowner in underlying unlawful detainer action. Plaintiffs alleged attorney sought reimbursement not permitted under law or contract. Dismissed on motion under Rule 12(b)(6). No appeal filed.
• In re Medialdea – Defense of attorney in FDCPA and CPA claims. Attorney represented prevailing landowner in an underlying unlawful detainer action. Plaintiffs alleged attorney sought reimbursement not permitted under law or contract. CPA claims dismissed on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion and FDCPA claims dismissed on a subsequent summary judgment motion. No appeal filed.
• Johnson v. Clallam County - Assisted in defense of County and employee in civil rights action. Plaintiff claimed his civil rights were violated when he was arrested and incarcerated when he refused to stop videotaping sheriff in his vehicle during communications. Dismissed on summary judgment. Affirmed on appeal.
• Moore v. King County Fire Protection District No. 26, et al – Assisted in defense of fire district, its fire commissioners, and fire chiefs. Plaintiffs alleged federal due process claims and state claims of disability discrimination, retaliation, and defamation. Federal claims were dismissed on summary judgment. Defamation claims were dismissed on directed verdict. Claims of discrimination and retaliation were dismissed after a seven-day jury trial. After appeal to the Ninth Circuit, the Washington legislature changed the definition of disability, and the case was remanded back to the trial court where it settled.
• Morta v. Camas Sch. District - Defense of claims of discrimination by a teacher against a school district. Dismissed on summary judgment. No appeal filed.