Is Former Bikram Yoga Lawyer's Legal Battle Almost Over?
Bikram Choudhury, founder of Bikram Yoga, continues to contest a more than $7 million verdictthat was decided by a California jury last year. The…
August 21, 2017 at 08:09 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Bikram Choudhury, founder of Bikram Yoga, continues to contest a more than $7 million verdictthat was decided by a California jury last year. The amount is owed to his former legal adviser, Minakshi “Micki” Jafa-Bodden, who brought a wrongful termination suit against him, his wife and their yoga empire in 2013.
Jafa-Bodden sued her former employer for allegedly firing her in retaliation for investigating sexual harassment and discrimination claims when she worked as the in-house lawyer for the international chain of yoga studios. She also alleged sexual harassment and gender discrimination.
She won punitive and compensatory damages in Los Angeles Superior Court in January 2016 but according to Jafa-Bodden in an interview Thursday, Choudhury has yet to “put up the bond.”
Choudhury's lawyers are appealing the 2016 judgment, but Jafa-Bodden's attorneys filed a motion to dismiss that appeal, claiming Choudhury has violated court orders.
In oral arguments Wednesday, one of Jafa-Bodden's attorneys, Carla Minnard, argued that Choudhury cannot appeal the judgment due to the disentitlement doctrine, which provides that someone cannot seek relief from the judicial system after evading its authority. This week's arguments were limited to Jafa-Bodden's motion to dismiss, not the merits of Choudhury's appeal in the case.
According to Jafa-Bodden's attorneys, Choudhury has violated court orders. A bench warrant for Choudhury's arrest was issued in May, with bail set at $8 million—the approximate amount Jafa-Bodden is owed from trial, plus interest.
In court Wednesday, Choudhury's attorney, Nick Pujji, a partner at Dentons in Los Angeles, argued that the yoga chain founder is faced with legal problems when he is “not a very sophisticated business person,” Law360 reported. Pujji claimed that his client was “scared and confused” and had to flee the country because he doesn't trust the American legal system.
In an interview following the proceedings, Minnard said she is confident that Choudhury's appeal will not be allowed to move forward. “I don't think we will ever get to the substance of the appeal,” she said. “I think it will get dismissed upon disentitlement.”
Minnard said the law is in her client's favor. “Given the state of the law and given the numerous violations of the trial court's orders by the appellant, I think I would say we have a fair level of confidence, but anything can happen,” she said.
Jafa-Bodden noted that this motion is “obviously important for us procedurally.” She had previously been awarded ownership of Bikram Yoga's IP rights and franchises. However, she said she has not yet obtained control of those assets.
According to the Bikram Yoga website, a teacher training is scheduled in Acapulco starting in September. Jafa-Bodden claims this is a violation of the cease and desist letter sent to Choudhury's lawyers July 10, and obtained by Corporate Counsel, which ordered Choudhury to stop “selling franchise territory, opening new yoga studios, advertising Bikram teacher trainings, seminars, lectures, master classes and any other solicitation, licensing or marketing of the Bikram brand…”
Pujji, Choudhury's lawyer, did not respond to a request for comment on the case or on whether he believes the upcoming training violates the cease and desist order.
“That's really the essence of this whole case,” said Jafa-Bodden. Choudhury is “brazen, he's undeterred and he doesn't consider himself to be bound by any of the court orders.”
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 AllSEC Puts Beat Down on Ex-Wrestling CEO Vince McMahon for Not Reporting Settlements
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
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