Lawbamba

Top best Government Relations Lawyer in zip code 84101 - Tom Berggren

Home   ➤ Utah   ➤➤ Zip- 84101 - Salt Lake City - Government Relations

Tom Berggren is among the top best Government Relations attorney in zip code 84101. While choosing Government Relations attorneys in zip code 84101, compare their reviews

Use the Legal issue filters to select and navigate to other areas of practice within the zip.



Tom Berggren - top best Government Relations Lawyer in zip code 84101

Tom Berggren

Rating: / 5


Area of Practice: Real Estate Law, Commercial Lending and Banking, Commercial Property Acquisition, Development and Management, Leader, Government Incentives for Relocation and Expansion, Resort and Leisure Development, Land Use/Entitlements, Business, Real Estate, Administrative Advocacy, Energy, Natural Resources and Environmental Law, General Counsel Services, Government Relations, Joint Ventures and Strategic Alliances, Nonprofit and Tax-Exempt Organizations, Outdoor Sports & Recreation Products Industry, Real Estate Finance, Retail Development

Zip code: 84101, Salt Lake City, Utah



Contact: 801-534-7449
Jones, Waldo, Holbrook & McDonough A Professional Corporation.
170 S. Main Street.

AJ Pepper - top best Government Relations Lawyer in zip code 84101

AJ Pepper

Area of Practice: Commercial Finance, Government Relations, Master Planned Communities and Subdivisions, Office, Industrial, Retail, Mixed Use and Medical, Real Estate, Real Estate Litigation, Zoning and Land Use

Zip code: 84101, Salt Lake City, Utah



Contact: 801-257-1813
Snell & Wilmer L.L.P..
Gateway Tower West.

FAQs - Government Relations Attorneys in 84101

Government Relations Case examples in zip code 84101

Description: Legal and strategic issues involving the relationship between energy companies and government entities, including lobbying and regulatory compliance. Case Example: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) - While not specific to energy, this case significantly impacted corporate political spending, including by energy companies. Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled that corporate funding of independent political broadcasts in candidate elections cannot be limited.