Cognizant Has Paid $15M in Legal Fees for Ex-Chief Legal Officer Facing Bribery Charges
Now, the company refuses to pay one of the three law firms that represent the former CLO, arguing that its fees are "abusive" and unreasonable.
January 02, 2020 at 04:55 PM
5 minute read
Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. has paid $15 million in legal fees for its former chief legal officer, Steven Schwartz, who is facing federal charges in a foreign bribery case. But Schwartz is now suing the global tech services company because it cut off payment to one of the three law firms that represent him.
Schwartz alleges in his lawsuit that Cognizant stopped paying advancements to the New York-based Bohrer law firm shortly before Thanksgiving, after having previously paid the firm's invoices from June 2018 through September 2019. Cognizant disclosed in a court filing that it advanced $8.36 million in fees to Bohrer before stopping payment in November.
Schwartz and Cognizant ex-president Gordon Coburn face criminal charges for allegedly authorizing a building contractor to pay more than $3.6 million in bribes to a government official in India and attempting to hide the illicit payments.
Cognizant agreed in February to pay a $25 million civil penalty to settle allegations that it violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. The company's ex-chief operating officer, Sridhar Thiruvengadam, later agreed to pay a $50,000 civil penalty and cooperate with investigators as part of a settlement offer.
As the bribery case unfolds, Cognizant continues to pay the other two firms that represent Schwartz: Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and Gibbons. The New Jersey-based Fortune 200 company also is covering Coburn's legal costs and says it has advanced $20 million in legal fees for the two former executives during the past 18 months.
Schwartz, who sued Cognizant on Dec. 16 in Delaware's Court of Chancery, argues that the company is required under an indemnification agreement to pay advance fees for his defense, while Cognizant contends that Bohrer's bills are "abusive" and unreasonable.
According to Cognizant, Bohrer "has only four attorneys, none of whom had any prior experience in criminal defense; and its lead attorney has a corporate background and no litigation experience at all.
"Despite this, Bohrer PLLC has sought (thus far) payment of more than $10 million in fees—double the amount billed by Paul Weiss. Bohrer PLLC also has billed roughly twice as much as the attorneys at another national firm who represent Mr. Schwartz's co-defendant (another former Cognizant official whose fees Cognizant has advanced in full)," the company states.
"After having advanced Bohrer PLLC's fees of approximately $8.36 million, and then receiving its September 2019 invoice of approximately $1.7 million, Cognizant advised Mr. Schwartz that it would no longer advance fees billed by Bohrer PLLC," Cognizant adds.
In his reply to Cognizant, Schwartz argues that his legal expenses are reasonable and that he "is an expert in identifying and selecting consulting services needed for a crisis and an expert at managing outside spend."
He adds, "Indeed, that was one of the reasons that Cognizant expanded his role elevating him to Executive Vice President, Chief Legal and Corporate Affairs Officer. If anyone is well-positioned to assemble and monitor his defense team, it is Schwartz, who is intimately familiar with the work that Bohrer PLLC has engaged in."
Schwartz goes on to note that Cognizant has hired at least four law firms, including Goodwin Procter, DLA Piper, Latham & Watkins, and Ross Aronstam & Moritz, and has spent more than $100 million on its defense.
A spokesman for Schwartz and his legal counsel, Steven Goldberg of Sard Verbinnen & Co., said in a statement that "Cognizant's latest attempt to deny Mr. Schwartz his contractual right to advancement relies on a blatant mischaracterization of Bohrer PLLC and the role the firm plays in Mr. Schwartz's defense.
"As an experienced attorney and former chief legal officer, Mr. Schwartz is uniquely positioned to select the team he believes is best qualified to defend himself against the government's case, which never should have been brought," he added. "Bohrer, along with other members of Mr. Schwartz's legal team, deploys creative legal approaches that Mr. Schwartz believes are critical to his defense."
Meanwhile, Cognizant spokesman Rick Lacroix stated that the company "has advanced legal fees to Mr. Schwartz for more than two years and has had no billing disputes with two of his law firms. As this billing dispute with Bohrer PLLC has moved into court, we look forward to vigorously defending ourselves in court."
Read More:
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 AllContract Software Unicorn Ironclad Hires Former Pinterest Lawyer as GC
2 minute readHow Amy Harris Leverages Diversity to Give UMB Financial a Competitive Edge
5 minute readAuditor Finds 'Significant Deficiency' in FTC Accounting to Tune of $7M
4 minute readDog Gone It, Target: Provider of Retailer's Mascot Dog Sues Over Contract Cancellation
4 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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