Attorney Stephen Raher focuses on day-to-day success for his clients, many of which are not public - such as confidential settlements that avoid the publicity and expense of legal proceedings. Here is a collection of some notable matters that can be publicly disclosed:

Litigation

• 2026: Confirmed contested subchapter V plan of reorganization, including temporary injunction against enforcement of third-party guaranties.
• 2025: Represented creditor in successfully moving for appointment of chapter 11 trustee due to debtor’s financial malfeasance.
• 2024: Represented chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee in action to recover fraudulent transfers. Obtained $1.2 million judgment following trial, assisted in partial collection.
• Larsen v. Selmet (Oregon Sup. Ct., Case No. S069895): successfully argued appeal of trial court’s denial of chapter 7 trustee’s motion to substitute real party in interest.

Transactions

• 2025-26: Represented insolvent non-profit healthcare provider in transfer of assets to acquiring organization. The transaction preserved the acquirer’s ability to draw predecessor’s federal grant funds and preserved critical healthcare services in three rural counties.
• 2026: Represented addiction services provider in successful resolution of $3.5 million billing dispute with insurance provider.
• 2024: Represented landowner in sale of 76-acre industrial property. Work included due diligence, resolution of environmental remediation plans, negotiating transactional documents with buyer, and negotiating two easements with the City of Portland.
• 2024: Negotiated consensual subchapter V plan of reorganization for a mid-sized food manufacturer. Successfully resolved disputes with commercial landlord, general contractor, senior secured lender, equipment lessors, and the U.S. Small Business Administration.

Regulatory Matters

• Rates for Interstate Inmate Calling Services (WC Dkt. 12-375) and Incarcerated People’s Communications Services; Implementation of the Martha Wright-Reed Act (WC Dkt. 23-62), Federal Communications Commission rulemaking. Submitted numerous comments and ex parte presentations from 2013 through the present as an individual party and as counsel for Prison Policy Initiative (2015-2023) and Worth Rises (2026-present).
• Served as testifying expert witness for public interest group protesting proposed change in ownership of leading incarcerated people’s communications services provider.
• In re MCP 191 (U.S. Ct. of App., First Circuit, Case 24-8028). Counsel for public interest parties defending FCC rules regulating incarcerated people’s communications services.
• Securus Tech. v. Public Utilities Comm’n (Calif. Ct. App. Case No. B320207). Represented public-interest intervenor in successful defense of interim rate caps on incarcerated people’s communications services.