Christopher H. Wood


Chris is a partner in the Denver and Washington, D.C. offices of Lewis Brisbois, and practices with the firm’s Antitrust and Class Action groups. He has over 25 years of experience, with expertise in antitrust, government investigations, data privacy disputes, and complex and commercial litigation. Chris represents plaintiffs and defendants (from individuals to Fortune 500 companies) in state and federal proceedings.  His antitrust and competition law experience includes private party litigation, class actions, and opt-out proceedings in regulated and unregulated industries. His extensive practice experience has aided him in providing effective counseling, training, and tailored audits for clients navigating the antitrust and fair trade risks inherent in daily operations.

Chris also focuses on other commercial proceedings and intellectual property matters, managing and handling all phases of business disputes. In recent years, the subject of these representations has involved statutory, constitutional, and common law claims arising from disputes over, among others, trademark usage, commercial real estate transactions, private entity membership interests, service contracts, consulting agreements, and consumer rights.  Data security incident / breach, and data privacy class action defense litigation constitutes a sizeable portion of Chris’s docket.

Before joining Lewis Brisbois, Chris practiced with Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office, and then as a partner at two other DC firms. Chris currently is the chair of the Colorado Bar’s Business Law Section’s Antitrust and Consumer Protection subsection and is an adjunct professor of law at the University of Denver, Sturm College of Law, teaching antitrust law.

Academia – Law School Adjunct Professor

Chris is an Adjunct Professor of Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law at the University of Denver’s Sturm College of Law. His course explains the history and fundamentals of antitrust and unfair competition laws in the United States. Among other topics, the course tackles the competitive issues that arise from monopolization, competitor agreements, international cartel activity, and mergers. The course also examines the interplay between federal, international, state, and private enforcement of the laws underlying the competitive process, including these federal statutes: Sherman Act, Clayton Act, Robinson-Patman Act, The Federal Trade Commission Act, Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, and Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act. Through an interactive teaching modality, Chris guides rising attorneys in understanding numerous forms of legal analysis applicable to the antitrust laws, including distinctions between vertical v. horizontal conduct, single firm v multi-firm conduct, intrastate v interstate v. foreign (non-U.S.) competitive affects, rule of reason v per se (e.g., price fixing, group boycott, bid-rigging) Sherman Act analysis, motion to dismiss v. summary judgment legal standards of review, and unlawful price discrimination v. sanctioned pricing practices.

Professional Presentations


  • State Bar Admissions
    • Colorado
    • District of Columbia
  • United States District Courts
    • United States District Court for the District of Colorado
  • United States Courts of Appeals
    • United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit


District of Columbia


United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

United States District Court for the District of Colorado


  • Chair, Antitrust and Consumer Protection Subsection, Business Law Section, Colorado Bar Association
  • Member, Equity, Diversity, & Inclusivity Committee, Business Law Section, Colorado Bar Association
  • Member, Colorado and Denver Bar Associations
  • Former Director, Legal Transformation Institute, designing business models and funding mechanisms for lawyer/non-lawyer entrepreneurs/intrapreneurs seeking to deliver cost-effective legal services and products


College of William & Mary, Marshall-Wythe School of Law

Juris Doctor, Law Foundation Scholar, 1994

Washington & Lee University

Bachelor of Arts, Politics, Phi Beta Kappa, 1990

Representative Matters

  • Counsel for officers/members of healthcare company in California state action alleging violations of the state’s antitrust laws (Cartwright Act), civil conspiracy, aiding & abetting, and tortious interference. Litigation pending.
  • Counsel for third-party franchisee in federal no poach class action in restaurant industry. Matter pending in the Western District of Kentucky.
  • Litigation and settlement counsel for restaurant group in class action data security incident lawsuit brought in California federal court and involving allegations concerning consumer personally identifiable information (PII).  Settlement approval pending.
  • Defense counsel for health care provider in data incident / data breach class actions pending in Indiana state court.  Plaintiffs assert statutory and common law claims concerning PII and consumer personal health information (PHI).  Litigation pending.
  • Counsel defending national lodging company in federal lawsuit in the Eastern District of Texas. Plaintiffs primarily allege horizontal antitrust conspiracies at multiple levels of the hotel room booking & distribution chain, with client asserting Lanham Act and state/common law infringement and unfair competition counterclaims. “Early out,” favorable settlement with no admission of liability.
  • Litigation counsel for transport company defending against consolidated class action in Utah federal court arising from a cyberattack perpetrated against client’s data network.  Litigation pending with consolidated class action to be filed.
  • Represent third-party media company in SEC investigation concerning possible violations of the Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934, Sections 17(a) and 10(b), respectively.
  • Counsel for behavioral healthcare provider in Colorado data breach class action alleging multiple classes and statutory and common law violations. Motion to dismiss granted on consumer protection and Colorado state class claims. Matter pending.
  • Represent automotive aftermarket company in Lanham Act trademark litigation in which statutory antitrust affirmative defense asserted. Litigation pending with issues
    narrowed for trial.
  • Antitrust counsel for trade association defendant in federal antitrust litigation in the District of Connecticut alleging Sherman Act violations, including group boycott, price fixing, and monopsony, as well as state law antitrust and common law tort claims, stemming from alleged anticompetitive horizontal dealings surrounding the licensing of public performance rights. Motion to dismiss granted with plaintiff declining to attempt to amend.
  • Counsel for realty group and agent in property sale data breach private action alleging violations of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act (CCPA) and various common law wrongs.  Motion to dismiss granted on CCPA and bailment claims, leading to settlement at levels far below plaintiff’s initial demands.
  • Antitrust counsel for complainant in ITC Investigation and counterclaimant in District of New Jersey, alleging violations of Section 337 of the Tariff Act and the Sherman Act, respectively, arising from alleged anticompetitive horizontal and vertical conduct associated with respondent’s distribution model and related market practices. Dispute settled.
  • Co-counsel for putative class alleging manufacturer/OEM vertical and horizontal conspiracies in violation of sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act.
  • Counsel for automotive parts manufacturers in Third Circuit litigation. After three years of pre-trial proceedings, prevailed at trial on all counts pertaining to liability, including monopolization and a violation of the Clayton Act. Case settled on the eve of damages trial for $500 million.
  • Counsel in California federal court proceeding for nation’s largest irrigation district alleging monopolization and other unfair trade practices against independent service operator (ISO). Settlement pending.
  • Defended household goods carrier in class litigation alleging violations of federal antitrust law and carrier regulations. Class claims favorably settled.
  • Co-counsel for electronics retailers and mobile telephone providers in direct action litigation alleging Sherman 1 violations, and for certain clients, breaches of contract.
  • Represented chemicals company in DOJ criminal investigation pertaining to sales of polychloroprene and ethylene propylene diene monomer, and served as settlement counsel resolving associated federal and state, direct and indirect, class and opt-out litigation.
  • Defended construction contractor in criminal investigation and related False Claims Act action alleging bid rigging on international building projects. Matter concluded with no findings of liability or imposition of criminal fine against client.
  • Advised client on enhancements to corporate compliance policies regarding Sherman Act and ethics practices, developed associated training program, and presented same to multiple business units.
  • Served telecom entity in a series of successful industry acquisitions in which governmental authorities issued HSR second requests.
  • Defended polyester staple supplier in criminal antitrust investigation and civil litigation. Matter resolved with U.S. government via negotiation whereby cooperation provided in exchange for corporate leniency/amnesty, and employed “first out” settlements with federal and state class plaintiffs to quickly limit and terminate client exposure.
  • Developed and instituted comprehensive records and personnel audit to assess legality of client’s business practices vis-à-vis horizontal competitors, leading to revision and enhancement of corporate ethics/code of conduct protocols.
  • Defended client in criminal, “three strikes” felony trial. Jury hung on all counts leading to release for time served.
  • Represented international technologies company in backdating SEC investigation involving rogue executive conduct.
  • Defended athletic apparel manufacturer in Lanham Act and unfair competition litigation, with case resolved via settlement on the “courthouse steps” days short of trial.
  • Counsel for real estate development group alleging contractual breaches and torts arising from commercial property transaction, with favorable settlement obtained after surviving all defendants’ joint motion to dismiss.
arrow Back to Attorneys