Talbott, Simpson and Davis P.S.


Employment Law

Our firm represents and advises employers and employees in all areas of employment law, including: harassment and discrimination litigation; drafting and reviewing employee handbooks, guidelines, and policies; training in how to recognize and avoid workplace harassment and discrimination; drafting and reviewing employment contracts, including severance agreements and non-compete agreements.

Creditor’s Rights

We help banks, credit unions, financial institutions, and other businesses protect and enforce their legal rights.  This includes representing commercial clients in breach of contract actions, foreclosure actions, and as creditors in bankruptcy.  We also defend our business clients against civil claims asserted against them. 

  • Immigration Law
  • Construction Law
  • Employment Litigation
  • Personal Injury
  • Civil Rights Litigation
  • Criminal Defense
  • DUI Defense
  • Misdemeanor Defense
  • Discrimination Cases
  • General Civil Litigation
  • Water Law
  • Labor & Employment Law
  • Administrative Law
  • Contract Litigation
  • Real Estate Litigation
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Representation of creditors
    in Bankruptcy
Immigration Law

We have a proud tradition of representing clients from all over the world and all walks of life in immigration matters.  We represent clients in family petitions and business applications, “U” visas, VAWA applications, immigration court proceedings, and citizenship and naturalization applications.  Several of our attorneys and staff member are fluent in Spanish, allowing us to better serve our clients.

Criminal Law

Our firm represents individuals charged with misdemeanors, including D.U.I., and traffic infractions.  We also assist people remove past convictions from their criminal record.

Additional Practice Areas

We also represent clients in the other areas listed on this page.  A notable example is our representation of Ahtanum Irrigation District in a water rights dispute that dates back to 1945.  The case started in U.S. District Court.  In 1961 the case made its way to the United States Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, with a decision handed down in 1964.