Simpson Thacher Settles Recruiter's Suit Over Sullivan & Cromwell Hire
The deal to end litigation over a partner placement came as Simpson Thacher faced the potential release of more internal firm documents.
September 19, 2018 at 02:18 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
After discovery disputes about the confidentially of internal firm documents, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett has settled a recruiter's lawsuit that claimed the law firm failed to pay a placement fee for recruiting a former Sullivan & Cromwell partner.
“The action has been settled on confidential terms,” said Boston Executive Search Associates' attorney, Douglas Salvesen, of Boston-based Yurko, Salvesen & Remz, in a statement to ALM Wednesday.
Attorneys for Simpson Thacher and Boston Executive filed a stipulation in Manhattan federal court Tuesday to dismiss the suit with prejudice. Alan Turner, the Simpson Thacher partner representing the firm in the suit, did not return a message seeking comment.
The settlement came after the firm faced the prospect of the release of more internal firm documents. The parties were ordered to finish fact discovery Sept. 14, and a judge in recent months had rejected the firm's request to keep a firm memo confidential.
Boston Executive filed the suit against Simpson Thacher late last year, claiming it had introduced Michael Torkin, a Sullivan & Cromwell partner, to the firm, leading to his hire at Simpson Thacher. Boston Executive said Simpson Thacher owed it a standard recruiting fee of 25 percent of Torkin's expected first-year compensation, about $3.75 million, which would equal $937,500. The suit said Simpson Thacher has balked at paying any fee.
Proposing to amend its suit, Boston Executive also claimed its alleged damages expanded based on learning that the law firm may have paid the restructuring partner a $1 million signing bonus.
In defense, Simpson Thacher said in court filings that there was no written contract and that the recruiting agency was seeking “the benefit of a bargain it never made; payment of a fee that it never sought until after the fact, and that Simpson [Thacher] never agreed to pay.”
Earlier in the case, U.S. District Judge Lorna Schofield of the Southern District of New York, citing “sensitive business information” related to Simpson Thacher, sealed a letter on the docket and ordered other documents in the case sealed or redacted as well.
In one of the latest discovery disputes in the case, the parties tussled over a one-page July 2016 memo from firm chairman William Dougherty appointing six Simpson Thacher lawyers as internal “firm counsel” for disputes.
Simpson Thacher said the 2016 memo was a “private, confidential, and sensitive internal firm communication.” But Salvesen, the recruiting agency's attorney, urged the judge to order that the memo be redesignated as nonconfidential, calling Simpson Thacher's strict demand for the confidentiality of the document “silly.”
Ultimately, Schofield ordered that the memo shouldn't be treated as confidential under a protective order.
The memo shows the firm appointed six lawyers as firm counsel for “conflicts, ethics and liability matters related to the firm,” including Joseph Kaufman, Alan Klein, Joseph McLaughlin, J. Alden Millard, Lynn Neuner and Kathy Rose. The document was placed on the docket just days before the parties dismissed the suit.
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 AllHelping Lawyers Move Away from ‘Grinding’ and Toward a ‘Flow’
Why Litigation Demand Might Break Firms’ Boom-and-Bust Cycle
Trending 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