Sedgwick's $1.9M Clawback Settlement Gets Go-Ahead in Chapter 11 Approval
A California bankruptcy judge ripped into the attorney for a former partner objecting to the settlement Thursday, accusing her of introducing a new argument at the confirmation hearing.
January 31, 2020 at 03:59 PM
4 minute read
A California federal bankruptcy judge on Thursday approved a Chapter 11 plan for Sedgwick LLP that includes a settlement clawing back a total of $1.9 million from 47 former partners, over one ex-partner's objection to a provision barring non-settling partners from bringing claims against their colleagues who settled.
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Hannah Blumenstiel of the Northern District of California signed off on the agreement between the defunct firm, its creditors' committee and the settling partners after a 45-minute hearing, in which she admonished the resisting partner's attorney for introducing arguments that were absent from her recent filing on the matter.
Sedgwick initially filed for Chapter 11 protection at the start of October 2018.
The settlement approved Thursday returns more money to creditors than an earlier proposed clawback deal, which covered $1.595 million paid to 45 partners during the firm's 2017 collapse.
Nineteen former partners did not participate in the settlement, including Troy McMahan, a products liability litigator now with King & Spalding. His attorney, Sweet & Walker's Lorna Walker, argued Thursday that it was not appropriate to release the settling partners from all potential claims from their former colleagues who have yet to settle.
But Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones attorney John Lucas, representing the defunct firm, noted that in her filing objecting to the deal, Walker had not referenced the section of the Chapter 11 plan incorporating the settlement with the former partners at all. That point was quickly embraced by Blumenstiel, who called Walker out for being "disingenuous."
"You are asking me, ma'am, to consider an argument you did not make in your objection, and that I am not willing do," the judge continued sternly, after Walker claimed that Lucas and the debtor had no authority to seek a third-party release. "I will not permit sandbagging like this. Your objection that wasn't made is overruled."
Blumenstiel moved on to address the substantive arguments in Walker's filing, including McMahan's concerns that certain "under-capitalized" partners are receiving discounts in their settlements of up to 70%, while others are not. The specific contributions of the settling partners have not been revealed.
"This argument, I am inclined to find, fails to appreciate the point of a settlement," the judge said. "The settling partners specifically agreed to treatment other than what the plan would otherwise afford them. That's the point of a settlement. While Mr. McMahan chose not to participate in that settlement, that doesn't mean he's being treated unfairly or unethically."
Lucas meanwhile defended the settlement by noting that the group of settling partners includes 24 attorneys who had no claims against them or who are putting in more than claims against them.
"They are collectively putting in $800,000 towards this settlement," he said.
Lucas continued by noting if the matter was converted to a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, as McMahan has proposed, those gains would be eliminated, leaving just $1.1 million on the table. After contingency fees, that figure would drop to $800,000, resulting in $1.1 million less available to the liquidating trust.
Blumenstiel ultimately agreed with the conclusion that a conversion to Chapter 7 would be more costly.
"Any Chapter 7 trustees would have ramp-up costs. They would have to hire counsel. They would have to come to speed on the lay of the land. That would take time and money," she said. "I don't think Mr. McMahan's objection demonstrates that he's thought that through in the way one should."
With the approval of the Chapter 11 plan, the liquidating trustee will take over and will likely continue efforts to settle with the 19 holdouts.
"We're happy that it went well yesterday and that we were able to get it into the hands of the liquidating trustee," said Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton partner Michael Lauter, who represents the creditors' committee.
Lucas declined to comment on the hearing, and Walker did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
|Read More
Warning Signs: How Big Law's Greatest Failures Unfolded
Once Storied Sedgwick Files for Bankruptcy as Wind-Down Fails
LeClairRyan to Shut Down, Ending Three-Decade Run
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 AllBig Law Communications, Media Attorneys Brace for Changes Under Trump
4 minute readPolsinelli's Revenue and Profits Surge Amid Partner De-Equitizations, Retirements
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1NY High Court Returns Fired Priest's Discrimination Claim to State Agency
- 2Digging Deep to Mitigate Risk in Lithium Mine Venture Wins GM Legal Department of the Year Award
- 3Reminder: Court Rules and Statutes Apply to Pendente Lite Custody Decisions
- 4Consumer Cleared to Proceed With Claims Against CVS 'Non-Drowsy' Medication, Judge Says
- 5Ex-Schnader Partner Nears Settlement in Misappropriated Comp Class Action
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