Litigation Survey Shows Decline in New Cases
Although U.S. companies experienced a decline in lawsuits filed against them in the past year, legal departments are staying busy, according to a survey of more than 300 U.S. and U.K. in-house counsel conducted by Fulbright Jaworski.
October 15, 2007 at 05:22 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Although U.S. companies experienced a decline in lawsuits filed against them in the past year, legal departments are staying busy, according to a survey of more than 300 U.S. and U.K. in-house counsel conducted by Fulbright Jaworski
“The data this year point to a pronounced drop in new case filings–both against and by American companies, a reversal of the upward trajectory in the number of new lawsuits from our previous three surveys,” said Stephen C. Dillard, chair of Fulbright & Jaworski's global litigation practice.
The litigation trends survey reveals 17 percent of U.S. companies made it through 2006-2007 without defending a new lawsuit, up from 11 percent in the 2005-2006 survey. Of the 83 percent who did face at least one new case, 25 percent reported more than 20 new suits against their company. Those suits were most likely to be labor and employment matters, the most frequent source of lawsuits last year, followed by contract dispute and personal injury cases.
Larger companies were more likely to face new cases. While 44 percent of companies under $100 million made it through the year without a new suit, only 3 percent of billion-dollar companies had the same luck.
Lawsuits in the other direction have also decreased among the U.S. companies: 65 percent of U.S. in-house counsel said their company had initiated at least one lawsuit in the past year, a sharp drop from last year (70 percent) and 2004 (88 percent).
A majority of in-house counsel do not expect a reversal of the downward trend. Twenty-two percent of respondents expected the number of legal disputes in their company to rise, down from 33 percent last year.
Still, legal departments are staying busy with pending cases. A third of respondents are facing more than 25 pending suits, while 18 percent have a docket of at least 100 domestic cases. Only 10 percent of U.S. companies were free from pending court or regulatory matters.
Some other survey findings:
Regulatory: Thirty-six percent of U.S. in-house counsel report their company has been a target of a regulatory proceeding or investigation in the past three years, down from 49 percent last year. Twenty-five percent sensed regulatory proceedings against their company would be going up in the near future.
Class actions: Sixty percent of companies have had to defend at least one case of a group of “similarly situated” parties. Among smaller companies, 45 percent face class actions; among billion-dollar companies, 69 percent face class actions with 19 percent handling more than 20 class-based suits.
Securities litigation: Securities litigation has dropped, and respondents attributed this mainly to Sarbanes-Oxley legislation, closely followed by an increase in government enforcement.
IP matters: Nearly 40 percent of companies reported an increase in pace of IP cases filed against them. Twenty-eight percent said they were bringing more patent claims now than three years ago.
Outside counsel: Nearly half of U.S. companies said their annual outside counsel spending is under $1 million, including 85 percent of smaller companies, 42 percent of mid-sized companies and 16 percent of billion-dollar companies. Fifteen percent spent at least $10 million on outside counsel, including 27 percent of billion-dollar businesses. In-house counsel remained open to alternative billing arrangements, with most preferring fixed-fee arrangements. Still, 80 percent of respondents said they rarely or never pay their firms on a flat-fee basis. Sixteen percent said they would stick with hourly rates.
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 AllLululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Lawsuit Against Amazon Could Reshape E-Commerce Landscape
Trending Stories
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