FoxMandal settles outstanding salaries with unpaid staff
FoxMandal Little has paid out all of the outstanding salaries the firm owed to its Delhi-based fee earners. As reported last month, the Indian firm failed to pay Delhi fee earners their salaries in July after a cashflow problem caused by some 70% of the firm's overseas clients paying their bills late.
August 20, 2009 at 06:52 AM
2 minute read
FoxMandal Little has paid out all of the outstanding salaries the firm owed to its Delhi-based fee earners.
As reported last month, the Indian firm failed to pay Delhi fee earners their salaries in July after a cashflow problem caused by some 70% of the firm's overseas clients paying their bills late.
FoxMandal settled all of the unpaid salaries during the last two weeks. The firm said it had solved the problem by pushing clients to pay overdue bills.
Managing partner Som Mandal said: "We have been able to follow up with clients that had unpaid bills. As a result, we have improved the follow-up and billing process, which is good for the firm going forward. This has been a learning process for the firm."
Mandal confirmed that Delhi partners have still not been paid their full drawings but said these should be paid out by the end of this month. However, he added: "Partners always only draw what is available in the fund so in some ways I find this irrelevant. Most English firms also have issues with partner drawings."
As reported by Legal Week last month, the firm was considering external funding options to cover the short-term cashflow issue. According to Mandal, the firm is still actively looking at securing bank financing to cover potential future gaps in cashflow, although Indian banks do not typically lend money to law firms.
The Delhi office is FoxMandal's largest base, with around 130 lawyers. Staff in the firm's other Indian offices and its five-lawyer London office were unaffected by the salary problems. The firm runs four separate partnerships as Indian Bar rules limit law firms to a maximum of 20 partners.
This content has been archived.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 AllA&O Shearman, Cleary Gottlieb Act on $700M Dunlop Tire Brand Sale to Japan's Sumitomo
Stewarts and DAC Beachcroft Lead on £2B Leicester City Helicopter Crash Litigation
Israel's Rushed Corporate Tax May Spark Law Firm Mergers, Boost Large Firms Including Gornitzky
4 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