Ahead of Closure, Archer Norris Files for Bankruptcy
A week after announcing its intention to close, the California firm has started Chapter 11 proceedings in San Francisco.
August 24, 2018 at 06:49 PM
4 minute read
Archer Norris, a Northern California firm that announced last week its intention to close its doors by mid-October, filed for bankruptcy on Aug. 22 in San Francisco.
In its Chapter 11 filing, the roughly 70-lawyer firm said its board had hired Sacramento's Felderstein Fitzgerald Willoughby & Pascuzzi to advise it in bankruptcy court, as well as Russell Burbank, a senior managing director at accounting and consulting firm BPM, to handle its liquidation process.
Archer Norris will continue to provide client services until Sept. 24, the firm said in its bankruptcy petition. The firm also stated that all lawyers and clients are expected to leave by Sept. 15 as they search for new homes and employment opportunities. After that deadline, Archer Norris will continue to exist to the extent that funds are available.
But if those funds are not available to continue an orderly wind-down of operations, the firm's management committee has the authority to either enter into an assignment for the benefit of creditors under applicable California law or to convert its pending Chapter 11 case to a Chapter 7 liquidation.
According to a list of Archer Norris' 20 largest unsecured creditors, the firm owes $204,166.65 to Mokri Vanis & Jones (a California firm that several former Archer Norris partners have joined) for a “legal settlement,” as well as $15,737.50 to Los Angeles-bases economic consulting and forensic accounting firm Vavoulis, Weiner & McNulty for “expert fees.” Archer Norris also owes several landlords money for rent: LaSalle Income & Growth Fund ($164,303.44); Maquire Properties ($39,948.15); Boston Properties LP ($31,515.41); and JP XXXII LP ($13,341.38).
Archer Norris was created in 2000 via a merger between two legacy Bay Area firms. At the time of its dissolution, Archer Norris had four Golden States offices in Los Angeles, Newport Beach, San Francisco and Walnut Creek. Douglas Straus, who took over leadership of the firm in 2017, said last week that Archer Norris has not been doing well financially in recent years. That led to the decision by partners to close the firm, he said.
“Several factors contributed to the need for Archer Norris to wind down its operations, including the departure of over 20 attorneys from Archer Norris' Newport Beach office in 2016, the loss of 10 additional partners since January 2017, and the firm not being as successful during the last few years as it once was,” said Straus in a declaration filed with the bankruptcy court Friday supporting a motion to pay prepetition wages to employees who are still employed by Archer Norris on Sept. 7.
In its bankruptcy filing, Straus noted that Archer Norris still projects that it will have approximately $302,634 in accrued and unpaid prepetition payroll that needs to be paid out to its remaining employees.
“The debtor believes that this payment will maintain morale given that employees will only have received payment for only post-petition wages on Aug. 31, and receiving the second half of their paychecks will be a large inducement to stay and participate in the short wind down period,” Straus said in his declaration, which includes as an attachment the firm's plan of dissolution.
Archer Norris' largest secured creditor is MUFG Union Bank N.A., which is owed approximately $2.7 million under a line of credit and two equipment loans. Court papers show that Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell is advising Union Bank in Archer Norris' Chapter 11 case, one in which a status conference has been scheduled for Oct. 4.
The American Lawyer reported in January that bankruptcies for law firms have waned in recent years due to new workaround and pending case law. In March, the California Supreme Court unanimously ruled that dissolved firms do not have a viable claim to so-called unfinished business that former partners take with them to new firms. The decision was a win for Jones Day and other large firms that had pressed the case after hiring partners from Heller Ehrman following the 2008 dissolution of that San Francisco-based firm.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFaegre Drinker Adds Three Former Federal Prosecutors From Greenberg Traurig
4 minute readAnapol Weiss Acquires Boutique Led by Star Litigator Alexandra Walsh
5 minute readPierson Ferdinand Lures Veteran M&A Specialist From Sheppard Mullin in Silicon Valley
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250