Hughes Hubbard's Long Lehman Brokerage Wind-Down Could End in 2019
Wednesday will mark a decade since James Giddens, head of the firm's bankruptcy and corporate reorganization group, was named trustee for the liquidation of the failed banking giant's brokerage unit.
September 18, 2018 at 02:50 PM
4 minute read
Hughes Hubbard & Reed senior counsel James Giddens said this week that his decade-long work as trustee overseeing the liquidation of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.'s broker-dealer unit could be completed next year, marking an end to a decade-long odyssey that has generated roughly $400 million for Giddens' firm.
Giddens was appointed trustee on Sept. 19, 2008, to oversee the dissolution of the now-defunct financial services giant's brokerage unit under the oversight of the Securities Investor Protection Corp. In the decade since, his team has returned $115 billion to creditors and satisfied all but 381 of the roughly 140,000 claims made to the Lehman bankruptcy estate.
Lehman filed for Chapter 11 protection on Sept. 15, 2008, beginning the largest bankruptcy proceeding in U.S. history at a time when the global banking system faced its gravest crisis since The Great Depression. Weil, Gotshal & Manges grabbed the lead role on the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers' parent company, earning nearly $500 million in fees for its efforts.
As for Hughes Hubbard's work, the firm settled $106 billion worth of claims to Lehman's customer accounts.
One of the first moves Giddens made in managing the wind-down was to sell the busted bank's U.S. brokerage accounts, with a value of about $43 billion, to Barclays plc. A dispute over about $4 billion of the assets in that sale ultimately led to a petition to the U.S. Supreme Court filed by Giddens' team. The petition was denied, and a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in favor of Barclays was upheld.
General creditors, once expected to be nearly stiffed, have so far received nearly 40 cents on the dollar, Giddens wrote in a letter Monday detailing his progress to U.S. District Judge Shelley Chapman of the Southern District of New York. The matter used no taxpayer funds and no SIPC funds, which are made up of fees paid by member financial institutions.
“As a young associate in the late 1970's I helped write the SIPA statute and have represented SIPC and served as a trustee in many cases since that time,” Giddens wrote. “While the statute has evolved over the years, as indeed has the Bankruptcy Code, SIPA's core principles and all of its operative provisions remain the same. There is no doubt that Lehman was the single biggest test of the SIPA statute, and 10 years later even our harshest critics acknowledge that this test has become the statutes greatest success.”
Hughes Hubbard has submitted 26 applications for compensation during the matter totaling fee requests worth $397.3 million, according to court records. The firm has also requested compensation for $4.6 million in expenses. (As a matter of comparison, Baker & Hostetler partner Irving Picard has billed roughly $1 billion for his work as trustee for funds related to Bernard Madoff's massive Ponzi scheme.)
Hughes Hubbard's work has tapered off in recent years. From January through April 2018, the firm's fee request totaled $2.25 million. From 2009 through 2015, Hughes Hubbard filed 18 fee requests that averaged nearly $20 million. The firm's largest request, for $37 million, came in May 2013.
“This proceeding has been a success, but 10 years later the key lesson of Lehman remains that such a failure should be avoided altogether, for the benefit of all stakeholders,” Giddens wrote in a presentation filed in court this week. (Giddens, a former partner at Hughes Hubbard who remains chair of the firm's bankruptcy and corporate reorganization group, switched to a senior counsel role two years ago.)
The collapse of Lehman not only upended the Big Law world, despite generating years of work for bankruptcy litigators, but it also left the financial affairs of thousands of company employees and shareholders in shambles. One of those individuals, former Lehman in-house lawyer Charles Kwalwasser, spoke with CNBC about his experience.
Related Stories:
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 AllKirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
5 minute readArnold & Porter Matches Market Year-End Bonus, Requires Billable Threshold for Special Bonuses
3 minute readGrabbing Market Share From Rivals, Law Firms Ramped Up Group Lateral Hires
Trending Stories
- 1Georgia Supreme Court Honoring Troutman Pepper Partner, Former Chief Justice
- 2Insurer Not Required to Cover $29M Wrongful Death Judgment, Appeals Court Rules
- 3Slideshow: Jewish Bar Association of Georgia Marks 1st Year With Hanukkah Party
- 4Holland & Knight Launches Export Control Disputes and Advocacy Team
- 5Blake Lively's claims that movie co-star launched smear campaign gets support in publicist's suit
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