×
Go back to Martindale-Avvo ➔

Nyemaster Goode, P.C.Member
Sarah Jane Gayer

Sarah Jane Gayer

Not yet reviewed

625 First Street South East, Suite 400, Cedar Rapids, IA 52401-2030

Appellate Practice, Business and Commercial Litigation, Copyrights and 10 more

About Sarah Jane Gayer

Sarah Jane Gayer is a lawyer practicing appellate practice, business and commercial litigation, copyrights and 10 other areas of law. Sarah received a B.A. degree from Duke University in 1993, and has been licensed for 29 years. Sarah practices at Nyemaster Goode, P.C. in Cedar Rapids, IA.

Sarah Jane Gayer (Cedar Rapids, Iowa)

Awards

AV Preeminent Peer Rated
This elite award is granted to attorneys who have been recognized by their peers for their very high ethical standards, with an average peer review score of 4.5 or higher.
Martindale-Hubbell Peer AV

Client Champion Awards

Client Champion awards recognize those attorneys who excel at service as affirmed by their clients. The awards, based on the quantity and quality of an attorney’s Martindale-Hubbell client reviews, demonstrate an ongoing commitment to delivering excellent client service. Award recipients stand out from their peers with a platinum, gold or silver icon.

Champion Badge Silver

At least three reviews and a score of 4.0 or higher.

Champion Badge Gold

At least six reviews and a score of 4.2 or higher.

Champion Badge Platinum

At least ten reviews and a score of 4.5 or higher.

Martindale Peer Awards

A lawyer who receives a minimum threshold of qualifying responses from fellow attorneys can qualify for one of three prestigious Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings:

Martindale-Hubbell Peer AV Preeminent Rating

AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

Sarah Jane Gayer got this award in 2021

Martindale-Hubbell Peer Distinguished Rating

Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

Martindale-Hubbell Peer Notable Rating

Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Avvo Awards

Avvo Top Contributor

Avvo Top Contributor: The Avvo Top Contributor Award is granted to attorneys who have earned significant contribution points in a given year on our sister site, Avvo.com. Contribution points are earned by answering questions in Q&A, publishing Legal Guides, and other useful contributions to the Avvo community.

Avvo Client Choice

Avvo Client’s Choice: The Avvo Client's Choice Award Badge is granted to attorneys with a significant number of 4+ star reviews in a given year.

Reviews for Sarah

This lawyer does not have any client reviews on Lawyers.com yet

Write a Review

Services

Areas of Law

  • Appellate Practice
  • Intellectual Property 3
    • Copyrights
    • Patents
    • Trade Secrets
  • Other 9
    • Business and Commercial Litigation
    • Intellectual Property Litigation
    • Intellectual Property Opinions
    • Licensing
    • Trademarks and Legal Brand Management
    • Health Care Litigation
    • Estate, Trust, and Fiduciary Litigation
    • Patent Infringement
    • Trademark Infringement

Practice Details

  • Firm Information
    Position
    Member
    Firm Name
    Nyemaster Goode, P.C.
  • Representative Cases & Transactions
    Cases
    Significant Cases: Eden Electrical v. Amana Co., 370 F.3d 824 (8th Cir. 2004) . Directly involved in representation of Israeli plaintiff in fraud litigation against Amana. After trial in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, the jury awarded $2.1 million in compensatory damages
    $17.875 million in punitive damages, the latter of which was reduced to $10 million by the trial court. Successfully defended compensatory
    punitive damage awards in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Successfully resisted Amana's petition for writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court. J. Lloyd v. Imperial Toy, Case No. 1:2006cv00043 (N.D. Iowa). Directly involved in representation of plaintiff in trademark, copyright,
    patent infringement litigation. Litigation resolved favorably for client prior to trial. Frontier Distribution, LLC v. CH Robinson Co ., Case No. 1:2007cv00048 (N.D. Iowa). Directly involved in representation of plaintiff in trademark infringement litigation. Successfully obtained injunctive relief against CH Robinson Company, a Fortune 500 company. P
    a Investments, Inc. v. Jabez Enterprises, Ltd ., Case No. 07-cv-114-LRR (N.D. Iowa). Directly involved in representation of plaintiff in litigation involving Lanham Act
    fraudulent transfer claims. Obtained default judgment in favor of client. The court ordered the United States Patent
    Trademark Office to rescind the fraudulently transferred trademarks
    also granted injunctive relief. RF Technologies Corporation et al. v. Applied Microwave Technologies, Inc. et al, Case No. CIV.05-32-P-C (D. Me.). Directly involved in representation of defendants in litigation involving claims of conversion, breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets,
    unfair competition. Obtained dismissal of claims against individual defendants for lack of personal jurisdiction. Succeeded in defending plaintiff's request for temporary restraining order
    preliminary injunctive. Litigation resolved favorably for client prior to trial. McIlhenny Co. v. Tabasco's Mexican Restaurant
    Patio, Inc ., Case No. 1:2005cv00029 (N.D. Iowa). Directly involved in representation of plaintiff in trademark litigation. Litigation resolved favorably for client prior to trial. Medical Associates Health Plan, Inc. v. CIGNA Corp ., Case No. C04-1025-LRR (N.D. Iowa). Directly involved in representation of plaintiff in breach of contract action against CIGNA Corporation. Obtained summary judgment on liability issues. Litigation resolved favorably for client prior to trial on damages issues.

Experience

  • Bar Admission & Memberships
    Admissions
    1997, Iowa
    All State and Federal Courts in Iowa, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court
    U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2009
    Memberships

    Professional and Community Affiliations

    American Bar Association

    Iowa State Bar Association
    Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board, 2003-2009
    Federal Practice Committee, 2003-2006
    Appellate Practice Committee, 2002-2004
    Young Lawyers Division Publicity Committee, 1998-2000

    Linn County Bar Association

    Board Member, Waypoint, 2009-2016

    Iowa Supreme Court Commission on the Unauthorized Practice of Law, 2014-present

  • Education & Certifications
    Law School
    University of Iowa
    Class of 1997
    J.D.
    with highest distinction
    Other Education
    Duke University
    Class of 1993
    B.A.
    English

    Duke University
    Class of 1993
    B.A.
    magna cum laude

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Cellular and Molecular Biology

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Botany

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Organismal and Ecological Biology

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Post-Baccalaureate Studies in Genetics

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Organic Evolution

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    and Chemical Reactivity

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Human Anatomy

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Cell Physiology

    Coe College
    Class of 2008
    Developmental Biology
  • Personal Details & History
    Age
    Born in 1971
    Sioux City, Iowa, 1971

Email Sarah Jane Gayer

Case type is required.
I am is required.
First name is required.
Last name is required.
A valid zip code is required.
Country is required.
State is required.
A valid city is required.
A valid email address is required.
A valid phone number is required.
Message is required.
0/1000 characters

By clicking the Submit button, you agree to the Terms of Use, Supplemental Terms and Privacy Policy. You also consent to be contacted at the phone number you provided, including by autodials, text messages and/or pre-recorded calls, from Lawyers.com and its affiliates and from or on behalf of attorneys you request or contact through this site. Consent is not a condition of purchase.

You should not send any sensitive or confidential information through this site. Emails sent through this site do not create an attorney-client relationship and may not be treated as privileged or confidential. The lawyer or law firm you are contacting is not required to, and may choose not to, accept you as a client. The internet is not necessarily secure and emails sent though this site could be intercepted or read by third parties.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA. See Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.

Thank you! Your message has been successfully sent.

For your records, a copy of this email has been sent to test@test.com.

Summary of Your Message
Case Type:
I am a/an:
First Name:
Last Name:
City:
Zip Code or Postal Code:
State:
Country:
Phone Number:
Message:
Return to Profile Reset Form
Lawyers.com Client Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Client Review Ratings™ display reviews submitted by individuals who have either hired or consulted the lawyers or law firms.

The Client Review Rating score is determined through the aggregation of validated responses. People who submit reviews are either individuals who consulted with the lawyer/law firm or who hired the lawyer/law firm and want to share their experience of that lawyer or law firm with other potential clients. Reviewers can be anyone who consults or hires a lawyer including in-house counsel, corporate executives, small business owners, and private individuals.

Martindale-Hubbell validates that a reviewer is a person with a valid email address. As part of the review process, respondents must affirm that they have had an initial consultation, are currently a client or have been a client of the lawyer or law firm identified, although Martindale-Hubbell cannot confirm the lawyer/client relationship as it is often confidential. The content of the responses is entirely from reviewers.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome and Martindale-Hubbell accepts no responsibility for the content or accuracy of any review. For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Client Review Ratings, please visit our Client Review Page

Martindale Peer Reviews

Martindale-Hubbell® Peer Review Ratings™ are the gold standard in attorney ratings, and have been for more than a century. These ratings indicate attorneys who are widely respected by their peers for their ethical standards and legal expertise in a specific area of practice.

The Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings process is the gold standard due to its objectivity and comprehensiveness. Lawyers solicited for peer reviews include both those selected by the attorney being reviewed and lawyers independently selected by Martindale-Hubbell. All reviewers are verified as attorneys through Martindale-Hubbell’s extensive attorney database. Only attorneys practicing at least three years and receiving a sufficient number of reviews from non-affiliated attorneys are eligible to receive a Rating.

What are the different Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings?*

• AV Preeminent®: The highest peer rating standard. This rating signifies that a large number of the lawyer’s peers rank him or her at the highest level of professional excellence for their legal knowledge, communication skills and ethical standards.

• Distinguished: An excellent rating for a lawyer with some experience. This rating indicates the attorney is widely respected by their peers for high professional achievement and ethical standards.

• Notable: This rating indicates that the lawyer has been recognized by a large number of their peers for strong ethical standards.

Lawyers who have received peer reviews after 2009 will display more detailed information, including practice areas, summary ratings, detailed numeric ratings and written feedback (if available). Details for individual reviews received before 2009 are not displayed.

Attorneys that receive reviews from their peers, but not a sufficient number to establish a Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Rating, will have those reviews display on our websites.

For more information on Martindale-Hubbell Peer Review Ratings™, please visit our Ratings Page on Martindale.com and our Frequently Asked Questions