Conrad & Scherer Loses Case Over Loan; Plaintiff Plans to Ask Court to Appoint Receiver for the Firm
Former client-turned-lender Douglas Von Allmen will argue at a June 19 hearing that the firm won't be able to repay him and still remain in business.
June 15, 2018 at 02:55 PM
4 minute read
A plaintiff who alleged Conrad & Scherer reneged on a nearly $20 million debt won summary judgment Thursday on several claims against the Fort Lauderdale, Florida-based firm.
Former client-turned-lender Douglas Von Allmen will ask the court next week to appoint a receiver for Conrad & Scherer — a move that would remove financial control from the firm's hands. His lawyers are gearing to argue at a June 19 hearing that the firm won't be able to repay Von Allmen and still remain in business.
“We have a security interest in all the firm's account receivables,” plaintiffs counsel Jonathan Feldman said. “When we enforce that security interest, the firm is not going to have the availability to fund day-to-day operations.”
But before the litigants reach that argument, Broward Circuit Judge John J. Murphy III must determine damages against Conrad & Scherer, which claims Von Allmen has an unpaid debt of “$2 [million] to $3 million easily” in unpaid legal fees.
“We respect Judge Murphy very much, (but) we don't agree with the decision,” Conrad & Scherer's defense counsel Albert L. Frevola Jr. said. “We think that there are a lot of disputes as to what the actual facts are. … All the court found is that money is owed, but the court hasn't yet determined how much money is owed.”
The firm denied any liability, arguing Von Allmen and the firm's founder, prominent litigator William Scherer, made several oral modifications to the loan agreements when the two men shared a yearslong friendship. It now questions Von Allmen's motives, suggesting the former client is intent on striking a lethal blow to the company and its founder.
“It's apparent the Von Allmens and their lawyers have been taking the steps to destroy the firm, which makes no sense,” Frevola said. “If they're really owed the money, why would they want to destroy the firm?”
Von Allmen filed suit in 2017 alleging he loaned millions to the firm to fund litigation against convicted Ponzi schemer and former law firm chairman Scott Rothstein and to launch a national human rights practice. He asked the court to enter judgement for breach of promissory notes, breach of guaranty and to enforce a security agreement.
Von Allmen also claimed his loan funded human rights cases against multinational companies — a venture that has brought negative attention to the firm. Former Conrad & Scherer partner Terrence Collingsworth allegedly paid witnesses to change their testimony in a case accusing Alabama coal conglomerate Drummond Co. of conspiring to kill labor activists in Colombia.
If Von Allmen gets what he wants — including interest, attorney fees and court costs — the judgment could reach $25 million.
But Conrad & Scherer said it was well capitalized.
“'The firm's going to continue,” Frevola said. “There are assets that the firm has that exceeds any money owed to Mr. Von Allmen.”
A hearing on June 19 will determine next steps in the litigation.
“The judge granted all the relief we requested,” said plaintiffs counsel Feldman, a partner in Perlman Bajandas Yevoli & Albright's litigation practice. “Now that liability has been established, it's now just a mathematical calculation as to what is owed.”
Related stories:
Conrad & Scherer Firm Facing $20M Client Lawsuit
$20 Million Loan Comes Back to Haunt Broward Law Firm, Defense Counsel
Read the ruling:
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
© 2025 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 AllUS Judge Dismisses Lawsuit Brought Under NYC Gender Violence Law, Ruling Claims Barred Under State Measure
No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
5 minute readSecond DCA Greenlights USF Class Certification on COVID-19 College Tuition Refunds
3 minute readFlorida Law Firm Sued for $35 Million Over Alleged Role in Acquisition Deal Collapse
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 2No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 3Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 4Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 5Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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