Restaurant's $157M Malpractice Suit Against Seyfarth Can Proceed, Judge Says
A bankrupt restaurant company alleges the law firm failed to file expert reports and complete discovery in a timely manner, leading to $157 million in damages.
August 01, 2019 at 03:25 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
Seyfarth Shaw has lost its bid to immediately dismiss a $157 million legal malpractice suit brought by a bankrupt restaurant company. A New York bankruptcy judge on Tuesday allowed the malpractice case to proceed.
Blue Dog at 399 Inc., which planned to open a restaurant at 399 Park Ave., filed for Chapter 11 in 2015 to prevent its landlord from repossessing its space. Seyfarth was eventually hired to represent Blue Dog in its suit against the landlord, a Boston Properties entity. Blue Dog alleges the law firm failed to file expert reports and complete discovery in a timely manner, leading key evidence to be excluded.
The restaurant, represented by Pittsburgh lawyer Scott Michael Hare, had an earlier adversary proceeding against Seyfarth thrown out. But the latest complaint was allowed to move forward Wednesday, with U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Michael Wiles of the Southern District of New York referring to his statements at a hearing the day before. A transcript wasn’t immediately available.
The underlying landlord dispute, in which one of Blue Dog’s experts pegged its damages at $4.5 million, appears to have been settled last year for $300,000. Those funds, and the claim against Seyfarth, are more or less the estate’s only assets.
The restaurant pegs its damages in the malpractice case at a far greater amount than the landlord paid to settle. They rose, in Seyfarth’s telling, from a “groundless” $40.5 million in Blue Dog’s earlier adversary complaint to the “preposterous” sum of $157 million in its current iteration.
In its motion to dismiss the complaint, Seyfarth said it had managed to strike a deal with Boston Properties that would have allowed Blue Dog to move forward with its plans to run a restaurant. That deal fell through after Blue Dog’s owner, Elizabeth Slavutsky, backtracked, the firm said, and any potential damages are so tenuously related to its conduct that the suit shouldn’t have been allowed to advance.
Blue Dog’s lawyer said in its court papers that such arguments were premature, however. It said Seyfarth’s liability could be figured out at summary judgment.
James Peck, senior of counsel at Morrison & Foerster, who represents Seyfarth, declined to comment on the decision, as did Hare, Blue Dog’s attorney.
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 AllJudge Orders Rudy Giuliani to Court Amid Allegations He's Hiding Assets Under Receivership
'A Regressive Institution': SDNY Judge Rakoff Delivers Pointed Remarks on SCOTUS in Recent Appearance
2 minute readWho 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