Andrew Neiman


(303) 407- 2038

Download Bio | Download vCard

Andrew Neiman has experience representing clients in commercial and business litigation and advises companies on contract-based issues, commercial disputes, labor and employment, corporate governance, securities and equity-related disputes, fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, bankruptcy, and cannabis law. In addition, Andrew frequently represents parties in disputes over ownership of closely held companies. 

Andrew also has experience serving as outside general counsel for cannabis clients, providing general business advice, advice on employment matters, and guidance on state and federal regulations governing the operation of legalized cannabis businesses.  He also helps companies advance their business interests and avoid future problems by drafting contracts and internal policies.

Practice Areas

  • Commercial Litigation
  • Labor and Employment
  • Cannabis Law
  • Corporate Advisement

Bar Admissions

  • Colorado


  • Juris Doctor, University of Colorado Law School – 2019
    • Health Law and Policy Certificate
    • Student Note Published
    • Lead Outreach Editor, Colorado Technology Law Journal
  • Bachelor of Arts in Global & International Studies, with honors, University of California Santa Barbara, – 2015
    • Studied human rights abroad in Buenos Aires, Argentina and Port-au-Prince, Haiti

Professional Affiliations

  • Colorado Bar Association
  • Denver Bar Association
  • Colorado LGBT Bar Association

Personal Interests

Andrew speaks Spanish and enjoys skiing, Pilates, running, live music and theatre, and world travel.

Representative Transactions

  • Represented an owner of a privately held company in an ownership dispute regarding the operating agreement for breach of contract, civil theft, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, fraud, and Colorado Organized Crime Act (COCCA) violations. Obtained settlement of over $20 million before trial.
  • Represented a member of an LLC in a contract dispute whereby the LLC agreed to give him equity in exchange for meeting certain sales benchmarks. Claims included breach of contract, fraud, promissory estoppel, unjust enrichment, misappropriation of business value, and intentional interference with contractual relations. Obtained a judgement following a bench trial of over $200,000.