Judge Profiles

Since starting Legal Resolution Center in January, 1999, Richard Borchers has mediated and arbitrated hundreds of civil cases. These cases have included commercial disputes, professional negligence, personal injury, and domestic issues. Judge Borchers has served as a specially appointed district judge and as a special master.

Judge Borchers served as a full-time United States Magistrate Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Colorado from January, 1991 to January, 1999. In that position, he was responsible for civil case management. He also conducted hundreds of settlement conferences, which allowed most of those cases to be resolved without trial.

Prior to his appointment to a federal judicial position, Judge Borchers served from 1984 to January, 1991 as a District Judge in the Seventeenth Judicial District. He handled all types of civil cases, including probate and domestic matters. He has handled multi-week trials involving personal injury claims, product liability matters, and commercial disputes.

From 1975 through 1984, Judge Borchers was involved in the private practice of law. From 1971 through December, 1974, Judge Borchers was on active duty as a Judge Advocate General Corps officer for the United States Army.

Judge Borchers received his law degree in 1970 from the University of Colorado at Boulder. He received his bachelor's degree from Ripon College, Ripon, Wisconsin in 1968. Judge Borchers also his a master of arts degree (political science) from the University of Colorado at Denver and a master of arts degree (speech communication) from the University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, Colorado.

Judge Borchers has co-authored a text on juvenile law. He also has spoken at numerous seminars on various aspects of the law. Judge Borchers is a member of the Bars of Colorado, Wyoming, Illinois, and the District of Columbia.

Representative opinions authored by Judge Borchers:

• Bartley v. Isuzu Motors Ltd., 158 F.R.D. 165 (D.Colo.1994) (documents obtained from litigation group, such as American Trial Lawyers Association, are not subject to work product doctrine)

• Galieti v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. , 154 F.R.D. 262 (D.Colo.1994) (plaintiff required to submit to psychiatric examination without observer being present or the evaluation being recorded)

• Odell v. Burlington Northern R. Co., 151 F.D.R. 661 (D.Colo.1993) (nurse may give deposition testimony without qualification as expert, and nurses would be allowed to give deposition testimony, even though the nurses may not have prepared any written reports)

• In re Kobernusz , 160 B.R. 844 (D.Colo.1993) (statutory presumption that funds in joint account were joint was rebutted by testimony that only funds placed into the account were those of husband, but those funds did not lose character as earnings and Colorado exemption from garnishment remained applicable)