Fight Between Anidjar & Levine and Its 2 Former Staff Lawyers Just Got Messier
The countercomplaint alleges two former Anidjar & Levine attorneys disparaged the firm. It alleges they secretly started representing clients for their new firms weeks before leaving.
April 24, 2020 at 01:50 PM
4 minute read
A Broward Circuit Court fight between Florida personal injury giant Anidjar & Levine and a spinoff firm formed by two former employees just got messier.
Less than two weeks after plaintiffs Victor Demesmin Jr. and Jeremy Dover sued their former employer for allegedly trying to thwart their efforts to go it alone with a startup firm, Anidjar & Levine has delivered a counterblow: It alleges the attorneys secretly began representing clients for their new Fort Lauderdale firm, Demesmin & Dover, while they were still on company time.
The counterplaintiffs are Anidjar & Levine, its founding partners Marc Anidjar and Glen Levine, the firm's separate PIP litigation division, the Personal Injury Protection Lawyers P.A., and its managing partner Travis Greene. Demesmin and Dover called the lawsuit "a desperate and malicious attempt to steal the spotlight," and argued the plaintiffs had failed to identify a client they'd actually lost.
|
Related story: Former Anidjar & Levine Lawyers Accuse Firm of Weaponizing Its Network Against Them
|
Company resources?
Demesmin and Dover resigned in November 2019, but the countercomplaint alleges they started their firm in September, and sent demand letters to multiple insurance companies on behalf of a chiropractor client in October.
"Under the circumstances, it is reasonable to assume that Dover and Demesmin provided legal services for additional clients of D&D prior to leaving the employ of PIPLPA," the countercomplaint said.
Anidjar & Levine accused Dover and Demesmin of using its postage machine for those demand letters, which it said added "insult to injury."
The countercomplaint also alleges Demesmin and Dover defamed Anidjar & Levine after filing suit, by trying to convince at least two Florida lawyers to stop doing business with the firm.
Anidjar & Levine contrasted those allegedly disparaging comments with the plaintiffs' resignation letters, which said they'd been happy at the firm, and their exit interview forms, which said the only thing that could have made them stay was to have their "name on the wall," according to the countercomplaint.
Meanwhile, Demesmin and Dover said they "are not surprised" by the counterclaim, which they labeled an attempt to detract from their allegations.
"Of course, they are attempting to defend themselves in any way possible. They are alleged to have committed serious ethical violations by engaging in illegal patient-brokering through bartering the lives of the public during the COVID-19 pandemic," the attorneys said. "The defendants are grasping at straws, and we intend to shine a full light on the defendants' illegal actions. We have never hidden the fact from anyone at Anidjar & Levine we intended to leave their firm and start our own firm. We told this to Mr. Greene before we gave leave to which he did not object. The defendants' backs are against the wall and many people are watching. Since filing our complaint, new developments against the defendants are coming out seemingly every other day," the plaintiffs said via email. "This counterclaim makes this case even more intriguing, and demonstrates that desperate times do call for desperate measures."
Kevin Yombor and Avery Dial of Kaufman Dolowich & Voluck in Fort Lauderdale represent Demesmin and Dover.
Anidjar & Levine's attorneys Jeremy Slusher and Daniel Miller of Slusher & Rosenblum in West Palm Beach expressed a desire to keep their arguments in court.
"We prefer not to litigate cases in the media, so we will refer to the allegations outlined in our counterclaim and restate that our clients are confident they will be vindicated as this case proceeds," Slusher said via email.
The counterlawsuit seeks an injunction to block Demesmin and Dover from attempting tortious interference with advantageous business relationships, and accuses the two former employees of competing with Anidjar & Levine while still employed by it, breach of fiduciary duty, and defamation per se.
Broward Circuit Judge Carlos Augusto Rodriguez will preside over the litigation.
|Read the full complaint:
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 AllUS Bankruptcy Filings Rise 16.2% as Interest Rates, Inflation, and End of COVID Relief Hit Hard
3 minute read11th Circuit Revives Project Veritas' Defamation Lawsuit Against CNN
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Big Law Expected To Follow Milbank's Lead With Associate Year-End Bonuses
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-58
- 3Sweet James Clinches $17.4M Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California's Kings County
- 4In Lame-Duck Session, US Senate Confirms Illinois Federal Judge on Bipartisan Vote
- 5Gordon Rees Opens 80th Office, ‘Collaboration Hub’ in Palo Alto
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