Duane Morris Partner Suspended 6 Months for Overbilling at Former Firm, Saul Ewing
The Boston partner argued that billing irregularities were due to her "error-prone" billing tendencies, and were not intentionally deceptive.
December 13, 2019 at 05:28 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
A Boston-based partner at Duane Morris has been suspended for six months from the Massachusetts bar for inflating her billable hours when she was a partner at Saul Ewing Arnstein & Lehr.
Doreen Zankowski, a litigator who handles complex litigation, construction and corporate matters, is still listed as a partner on Duane Morris' website as of Friday afternoon.
The order of suspension was entered Nov. 18. A source with knowledge of the matter said Zankowski's suspension begins Dec. 18.
Both Duane Morris and Saul Ewing noted that the matter has is on appeal to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, the state's highest appellate court.
A spokesperson for Duane Morris said in a statement Friday: "As this matter has been appealed by the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers, the firm has no comment other than to note that the conduct at issue, which involved certain billing practices, all occurred entirely prior to Ms. Zankowski joining Duane Morris and that two of the three clients in question had actually presented testimony in support of Ms. Zankowski."
A spokesperson for Saul Ewing said the firm is declining to comment while the appeal is pending.
According to the Nov. 18 disciplinary opinion, Zankowski brought in more than $3.8 million to Saul Ewing in 2015, the year during which the alleged overbilling took place, and she was considered to be one of the firm's top rainmakers.
The opinion from the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County said the board of bar overseers recommended a two-year suspension, but Associate Justice Frank Gaziano wrote in the 41-page opinion that two years would be "too severe."
A one-count petition for discipline alleged that Zankowski "falsely inflated the number of hours on final bills sent to several clients, improperly entered her time as work by her associates, and knowingly billed clients for taking depositions that she did not attend," according to the opinion.
Zankowski argued that her billing errors were not intentional, the opinion said, and instead were a result of "inadequate, careless, rushed and error-prone" billing practices.
According to the opinion, Zankowski joined Saul Ewing as an income partner in 2011, making about $700,000 a year, and was promoted to equity partner in 2015.
Toward the end of 2015, when the firm was working on determining compensation for partners, she was called on to answer questions about her hours billed. She told the litigation department chair that she billed 3,173 hours and worked more than 720 non-billable hours in 2015, the opinion said.
"The litigation department chair was struck by what he described as the respondent's 'extraordinary billable numbers,' as well as a 'premium' in earnings resulting from the fact that the respondent's overall actual amount billed was more than the original value entered," Gaziano wrote.
After a review involving several members of firm leadership, the department chair became concerned that Zankowski may have billed for time she did not actually work, the opinion said.
She was also questioned about edits she made to associates' bills, and she explained that she sometimes assigned hours she worked herself to associates for tasks that would normally be assigned to associates, the opinion said. But the litigation department chair and general counsel were not satisfied with her answers about the billing irregularities.
Zankowski resigned from Saul Ewing, her last day being March 31, 2016, and moved to Duane Morris soon after.
Saul Ewing continued to investigate her billing practices after her departure and ultimately gave money back to clients, totaling about $260,000, for what it believed was the amount Zankowski had overbilled, the opinion said. The firm did not inform those clients about the reason for overbilling, and most of them ultimately followed Zankowski to Duane Morris, the opinion said.
In explaining the six-month suspension, rather than two years, Gaziano wrote that given the amount Zankowski brought into the firm compared with the amount credited to clients, it's clear that she was a significant revenue generator even without overbilling. And he wrote that she presented compelling arguments and a strong defense against the allegation that she had intentionally deceived clients.
Gaziano also noted that a close family member of Zankowski's was sick throughout 2015 and died just days before Zankowski's disciplinary hearing. While the board did not see her family events as a mitigation, Gaziano wrote, it's possible that her demeanor at the hearing was affected by her recent loss.
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 AllAs Tech-Focused Roles in C-Suite Expand, Newcomers Embrace Big Law Opportunities
What About the Old Partners Who Have No Interest in AI?
Avantia CEO Discuss Blurring Lines Between Law Firm, Software Provider and ALSP
8 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 3Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 4Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 5Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
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