Jenner Urges Judge to Reject Landlord's Arguments Over Key Affidavit
The Am Law 100 firm asserts that an affidavit written by the negotiator for the original landlord confirms its rent abatement claims.
July 30, 2020 at 03:41 PM
4 minute read
Jenner & Block has fired back in the ongoing litigation with the firm's landlord, urging a judge to keep in the court record a key affidavit about the law firm's rent abatement terms.
Jenner, responding to the landlord's attempts to strike the affidavit, called the moves "a baseless waste of time and diversion," according to papers filed late Wednesday in Cook County Circuit Court.
In its lawsuit first brought in May, an affiliate of the firm's landlord, Heitman, alleges Jenner & Block did not pay rent on its 416,200-square-foot Chicago office in April and May. It is now seeking from Jenner about $3.73 million, plus late fees and interest.
Jenner has said that the office has not been used, save for a small "skeleton crew" of employees, since the beginning of the pandemic. The law firm has argued that the 2006-signed lease included a provision that allows for an abatement for unforeseen consequences.
In June, Jenner countersued the landlord affiliate, alleging the plaintiff actually owes the law firm $840,000 in rent. The firm attached an affidavit to the counterclaim which the firm says confirms the abatement provision. The affidavit, dated June 17, is signed and written by Richard Stein, the lead negotiator for the original landlord for the 2006 lease. Heitman took over the lease in 2014.
"I believe the current pandemic is the very type of disruptive event to which Jenner & Block was referring in lease negotiations and for which Jenner & Block sought and received protection, in the form of rent abatement," Stein said in the affidavit. "No one from the current landlord or its counsel has contacted me to discuss the Lease terms or negotiations."
The landlord affiliate moved to strike Stein's affidavit, setting up the response filed by Jenner on late Wednesday.
"The landlord's contention that the Stein declaration should be stricken because the court may ultimately not admit the Stein declaration is another groundless attempt to hide from the relevant facts," the Jenner filing said.
Jenner declined to comment about the latest court papers. The attorney for the plaintiff did not respond to a request for comment.
Real estate experts say that a provision such as the Stein declaration is rare. Most similar clauses require specific cause such as so-called force majeure events. But according to the lease provision submitted to the court, the clause allows for broad abatement "force majeure or otherwise."
Jenner & Block is not the only Am Law 100 firm in litigation with its landlord amid a coronavirus pandemic and government shutdown orders that drove most big firms out of their physical office space.
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett filed a lawsuit against its New York landlord this week, alleging it has refused to acknowledge the law firm's rights to rent abatement, leading to $8 million in damages.
Like Jenner, Simpson Thacher said the firm has a "unique" clause in its lease, which began in 1987.
Under the lease, the firm said, Simpson Thacher is entitled to rent abatement when it's unable to use the offices for at least 60 days due to "force majeure" events, including circumstances where the government steps in and preempts the tenant's right to occupy its space related to a national or public emergency.
|Read More:
Jenner & Block Hits Back at Chicago Landlord, Says It's Owed $840,000 in Rent Credit
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 All'Further Investment in Power' Will Drive Big Law Business—But What About Clean Energy Projects?
6 minute readLegal Departments Gripe About Outside Counsel but Rarely Talk to Them
4 minute readAs Profits Rise, Law Firms Likely to Make More AI Investments in 2025
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
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