9th Circuit Puts the Nail in the Coffin of Howrey Trustee's 'Unfinished Business' Claims
The court adopted the position of the D.C. Court of Appeals, which found earlier this month that clients, not firms, control ongoing matters in a matter of first impression under D.C. law.
February 27, 2020 at 04:27 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has found that law firms have no claims to unfinished hourly matters that departing partners take with them to new firms under the partnership laws of the District of Columbia.
In the bankruptcy case of former Am Law 100 firm Howrey, a three-judge Ninth Circuit panel on Thursday issued a unanimous order adopting the position of the D.C. Court of Appeals. The D.C. court found earlier this month that clients, not firms, control ongoing matters in response to the Ninth Circuit's request that it weigh in on this issue of first impression under D.C. law.
The Howrey law firm shuttered in bankruptcy in 2011. Thursday's ruling turns back claims brought by Allan Diamond, the managing partner of Diamond McCarthy and Chapter 7 trustee overseeing the unwinding of the Howrey estate, who claimed that a waiver adopted upon the firm's dissolution to claims for unfinished business amounted to a fraudulent transfer of Howrey funds to firms where partners landed. In bankruptcy proceedings, Diamond's firm had brought claims for profits from ongoing hourly business that Howrey partners took with them to firms including Jones Day; Hogan Lovells; Kasowitz Benson Torres; Neal, Gerber & Eisenberg; Perkins Coie; Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman; Sheppard Mullin; and Seyfarth Shaw.
Writing for the D.C. Court in a Feb. 13 opinion, Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby of the D.C. Court of Appeals held that law firms don't have a "legitimate claim of entitlement" to hourly billed matters since clients have the right to control any given representation. "A law firm's belief that it will continue working on such hourly-billed client matters into the future constitutes no more than an 'abstract need' or 'unilateral expectation,'" she wrote.
Thursday's Ninth Circuit order "expressly adopts" the D.C. court's positions on the matter and republished its decision in full as an appendix.
The D.C. decision marks the third time a high court has rejected so-called "unfinished business" claims. The New York Court of Appeals and the California Supreme Court made similar findings in July 2014 and March 2018 in bankruptcies involving Thelen and Coudert Brothers, and Heller Ehrman, respectively.
Jones Day has been leading the coalition of firms pushing back against unfinished business claims in law firm bankruptcies. Shay Dvoretzky, a Jones Day partner who argued the case before the D.C. court, told the American Lawyer earlier this month that bankrupt firms "don't have the right to collect work they didn't perform." Dvoretzky didn't immediately respond to a message seeking comment Thursday.
Christopher Sullivan of Diamond McCarthy, who represents the Howrey trustee, likewise didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
|Read More
DC Court Shoots Down Bankrupt Howrey's 'Unfinished Business' Claims
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 AllA Look Back at High-Profile Hires in Big Law From Federal Government
4 minute readFederal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
2 minute readGrabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
These Law Firm Leaders Are Optimistic About 2025, Citing Deal Pipeline, International Business
6 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-87
- 2The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 3Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 4Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 5Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
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