Sedgwick Wants $1.6 Million Settlement With Ex-Partners
The defunct firm says the clawback deal will expedite the resolution of Chapter 11 proceedings, but creditors have vowed to fight it.
June 07, 2019 at 05:54 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
The defunct law firm Sedgwick asked a federal bankruptcy judge Thursday to approve a clawback settlement with 45 former partners who have agreed to return a total of $1.595 million paid to them during the firm's 2017 collapse.
A 27-page filing by the firm's bankruptcy counsel indicates that certain partners who are not part of the settlement might still be vulnerable to breach of fiduciary duty claims.
Still, the firm said that the settlement will expedite the resolution of Chapter 11 proceedings in the Northern District of California, which began in October 2018.
“The debtor believes that further negotiation or active litigation against the settling partners will not increase the cash available for distributions to creditors but will only dissipate cash that could otherwise be used to pay the allowed claims of unsecured creditors,” said Sedgwick's bankruptcy counsel, John Lucas of Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones.
The filing also outlines the San Francisco firm's rocky final year, detailing its unsuccessful efforts to find new merger partners after losing two revenue-generating offices.
The filing stated that it has liabilities of between $10 million and $50 million, much of which consists of unpaid lease obligations. About $9 million of the defunct firm's liabilities are owed through accounts payable. In 2018, Sedgwick was sued by multiple landlords claiming that it failed to pay lease termination fees.
Thursday's filing noted the firm did not collapse through unsustainable guarantees to partners.
“It is important to note that the debtor was not a Dewey, Heller or Brobeck,” it said, referring to other defunct firms. “The firm's former equity partners were not operating under contractual guarantees that required the firm to pay partners fixed compensation without regard to such partners' actual book of business and receivables generated,” it said.
“Nor was the debtor inflating income or profits to ensure that partners would not leave or artificially enhance the firm's ratings,” the filing continued.
It also acknowledged the sacrifices of the partners who stuck around. ”Nearly all of the setting partners remained at the firm throughout 2017, continued to bring in clients, collect receivables and were paid a small fraction of what they were paid in prior years or what they could have been paid at [others] had they left the firm,” the filing said.
The bankruptcy filing by Sedgwick came after the set of former partners on the firm's dissolution committee hit a roadblock in discussions with a group of 12 of the busted firm's largest creditors.
The firm's creditors followed the firm's filing with a motion Thursday indicating that they would dispute the settlement. The creditors asked to convert a previously scheduled hearing June 13 into a scheduling conference for the pending fight.
But the judge in the case said Friday that scheduling and other details will be handled at a hearing now set for July 1.
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
© 2025 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 AllStatute of Limitations Shrivels $5M Jury Award to Less than $1M, 8th Circuit Rules
4 minute readRead the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readArizona Board Gives Thumbs Up to KPMG's Bid To Deliver Legal Services
Goodwin to Launch Brussels Office With Quinn Emanuel Antitrust Partner
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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