Partner fired for not meeting billing targets sues firm
A former corporate partner in the New York office of Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge is suing the firm after it fired him for failing to meet revenue expectations. Stephen Connoni, who joined the US firm in September 2007 but left one year later, sued the firm in April for allegedly "unilaterally and improperly" firing him without a required vote of the partnership and without paying him all that he was owed.
July 22, 2009 at 07:47 AM
3 minute read
A former corporate partner in the New York office of Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge is suing the firm after it fired him for failing to meet revenue expectations.
Stephen Connoni, who joined the US firm in September 2007 but left one year later, sued the firm in April for allegedly "unilaterally and improperly" firing him without a required vote of the partnership and without paying him all that he was owed.
Edwards Angell contends that Connoni breached the terms of his agreement by failing to bring in the business he had promised. Connoni acknowledges that he did not generate the $1.9m (£1.1m) in business projected in his agreement with the firm, but argues that Edwards Angell should have adjusted its expectations given the economic meltdown.
Edwards Angell recruited Connoni from K&L Gates, where he was an equity partner in the firm's New York office.
According to his complaint, Connoni began talking to Edwards Angell in summer 2007 about a move to the firm with the aim to grow its New York corporate practice. The firm hired him that September as a contract partner.
Under a letter signed by co-managing partner Terrence Finn and "agreed to" by Connoni, the firm was to pay him $625,000 (£380,000) in 2008 provided he generated $1.9m of new business and himself collected $800,000 (£490,000) in fees.
Starting in 2009, the firm would determine his compensation on the same basis as other capital partners, the agreement states.
Connoni and Finn talked about what would happen if Connoni did not meet the billing expectations, the complaint says. Finn proposed linking Connoni's compensation directly to how much he collected, the complaint states.
"Connoni rejected that proposal, explaining that while he hoped and expected to quickly succeed, the building of a department could take significant time and effort by both himself and [Edwards Angell]," the complaint says.
Connoni says they agreed that his compensation could be "appropriately" adjusted based on a variety of factors, including economic and financial conditions and the state of private equity and securities practice areas.
Both sides agree that Connoni did not meet the expectations.
Edwards Angell says it collected $135,000 (£82,000) for Connoni's work in 2007 and 2008, only 12% of what he promised in his agreement. The firm charges that he did not even show up for work at some times and failed to make timely capital contributions to the firm.
Among the explanations Connoni advances for failing to meet his targets were "problems in the private equity and securities offering practice areas, the credit crisis, the nearly unprecedented downturn in the general economy and the disruptions in the financial markets."
He claims he also was hampered by late-paying clients, a lack of firm support, the departure of key partners, and the failure of other partners to introduce him to firm clients.
This article first appeared in The National Law Journal a US sister title of Legal Week.
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 AllRopes & Gray, Willkie Farr, KWM, Dechert Act on Xerox's $1.5B Buy in China
Freshfields, MoFo Act on $1.8B TOPPAN Deal As Japan's US Buying Spree Continues
Cox & Palmer to Merge with Benson Buffett in St. John’s, Canada’s Easternmost City
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
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