'[The] reality for top 100 law firms in the US is that little about their business is secret'
Counsel for Oppenheimer Wolff

Taylor Joynson Garrett's US affiliate Graham & James has won a preliminary injunction in a bitter tussle with a rival firm concerning allegations of conspiracy to steal staff and trade secrets.

Judge Dzintra Janavs of the Los Angeles Superior Court granted San Francisco-based Graham & James the injunction last week, instructing Minnesota-based Oppenheimer Wolff & Donnelly to hand over any Graham & James trade secrets in its possession.

The battle started in July when Oppenheimer Wolff hired the managing partner of Graham & James' Silicon Valley office, Chris Graham, and his fellow partner Tim Hube to set up a tech-law office in Palo Alto.

Graham & James' attorneys claimed that the two partners passed on not only client information, but also the firm's plans and overall strategy via e-mail to Oppenheimer Wolff before they even left the firm in August.

Oppenheimer Wolff is alleged to have arranged to poach the rest of the office en masse, but was prevented by a Los Angeles court injunction in July which banned further poaching. The ban was also upheld during last week's ruling.

Oppenheimer Wolff denies receiving any secrets from Graham & James. "[The] reality for top 100 law firms in the US is that little about their business is secret," said Oppenheimer Wolff's counsel during the hearing.

Graham & James managing partner Larry Blume said of the court battle: "This is an egregious case, [with] a local managing partner attempting to deliver one of our offices to another law firm."

According to Graham & James, this is only the third time in recent US history that one firm has taken another firm to court over partner defections. The most recent case was concluded in June involving New York-based Whitman Breed Abbott & Morgan.
Partners who left Whitman Breed for another US firm were ordered to pay compensation for taking their clients with them.

Nancy Manzo, marketing director at Graham & James, denied that taking Oppenheimer Wolff to court was "over the top".

"It is unusual and it is precedent-setting, but it is not overboard," she said.