Judge Cites 'Troubling' Morgan Lewis Conduct, but Firm Skirts Disqualification
"Morgan Lewis apologizes to the court for allowing this issue to arise," partner Jason Mills told U.S. District Judge William Alsup, presiding over a wage-and-hour class action.
March 14, 2018 at 12:59 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius won't be disqualified from representing a hotel company in a California wage-and-hour class action, but a judge, citing his concerns about “troubling circumstances” involving the firm, imposed restrictions on the defense team.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California on Monday certified the class in a suit against Interstate Hotels & Resorts Inc. and Interstate Management Co. At the same time, the San Francisco-based judge said Morgan Lewis would be prohibited from cross-examining several would-be witnesses.
Morgan Lewis, which represents the Virginia-based hotel chain, was criticized by Alsup and the plaintiffs attorneys for representing would-be class members at their depositions without obtaining written consent beforehand. The firm, Alsup said, obtained declarations from hotel employees to oppose class certification. Morgan Lewis argued there was no conflict.
William Alsup. Credit: Jason Doiy / RecorderAlsup, citing the “troubling circumstances” about the origin of the declarations, ordered them struck. He added that the defense counsel will not be allowed to cross-examine at trial or on summary judgment any hotel employees the firm represented. Big Law Business reported this week on the order.
The lead plaintiff, Dina Rae Richardson, a hotel room attendant, will be joined by roughly 350 hourly hotel workers in the class. Richardson, represented by the Matern Law Group of Manhattan Beach, claimed in her suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California that management required workers to forego breaks and work off-the-clock at the Sheraton Fisherman's Wharf Hotel in San Francisco.
The hotel has denied the allegations and said the claims did not represent a “sweeping” practice that prevented workers from taking lawful breaks.
The Morgan Lewis team, led by partner Jason Mills in Los Angeles, told the court in December that the defense lawyers “evaluated the propriety of the limited representations and concluded there are no conflict in the circumstances.” Mills said the team—which included three associates—“completed the representations professionally and within the limited scope they believed the ethical rules permit.”
Mills added: “Where the circumstances show, at most, an accidental transgression motivated by good intentions, disqualification is not necessary to reinforce to these lawyers the importance of maintaining ethical standards.”
Mills was not immediately reached for comment Wednesday, and Morgan Lewis did not immediately return a message seeking comment.
Alsup declined to disqualify Morgan Lewis from its work for Interstate Hotels, a client for whom the firm first handled a wage-and-hour case in 2014. (Mills told the court in a declaration that the firm has handled “many more” for the hotel company since then.)
Still, Alsup said he was “bothered” by Morgan Lewis' role in representing three would-be class members.
“The foregoing unilateral and one-sided procedure followed by defense counsel bothered the court both because it undercuts the reliability of the resulting declarations and because defense counsel knew they were dealing with employees putatively adverse to their employer and its counsel—employees that Richardson and her counsel sought to represent,” Alsup said.
Alsup said in his order that “defense counsel represented more than one client with at least potentially conflicting interests in this litigation, without obtaining informed written consent beforehand and in violation of” the California rule governing the representation of clients with adverse interests. The judge said Morgan Lewis “could be disqualified entirely from the case as a result.”
Mills, writing in a court filing in December, told Alsup: “Morgan Lewis apologizes to the court for allowing this issue to arise.” And the firm vowed that it had learned from the experience.
“In hindsight, the better practice would have been to obtain, in an abundance of caution, advance written waivers from Interstate and the three former employees, or to have offered separate counsel to the three former employees for representation at their depositions, or to have simply defended the depositions without representing the three former employees,” Mills wrote. “Morgan Lewis will certainly not repeat this conduct, in this court or any other.”
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 AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
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