Nasty Fight Over Litigation Funding in Florida Crosses Into Texas Court
Florida attorney J.B. Harris said he denies all of the allegations in former co-counsel Phillip Howard's lawsuit in Texas. “It's a frivolous lawsuit and I'm going to seek sanctions against him,” Harris said.
April 02, 2019 at 02:47 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Two Florida lawyers, already battling in court in their home state, are now embroiled in a fee dispute in a Houston court.
In the Sunshine State case filed last summer, Coral Gables, Florida, attorney J.B. Harris alleged that his former co-counsel, Tallahassee litigator Phillip T. Howard, “usurped” a portfolio of tobacco cases potentially worth millions of dollars. Harris claimed the attorneys reached an agreement in 2017 for Howard to finance the cases and pay Harris a $225,000 salary with benefits and in exchange, Howard would keep 80 percent of fees from the litigation.
Related story: 'Everything Went to Hell': Coral Gables Attorney Sues Former Co-Counsel Over Tobacco Cases
Now, the same 2017 agreement has come up again in new litigation in Texas, but the tables have turned.
This time, Howard and his firm sued Harris and his firm over the 2017 fee-sharing agreement, said the March 29 petition in Howard v. Harris, filed in Harris County's 127th District Court. The lawyers' agreement divvied up cases into three categories with different fees for each: The first was a 50-50 split between the pair; the second was a 60-40 split with Howard getting more; and the third was an 80-20 split with Howard getting more. Most of the cases fell into the 80-20 category, the petition said.
Later, in April 2018, a litigation investment fund called Virage Capital Management entered a settlement agreement with Howard and Harris. This agreement said Howard would no longer have to pay advance case expenses, and Harris would get a greater share of fees under the lawyers' previous agreement. Now, the split would be 60-40 with Harris getting more.
The petition said that Howard agreed to pay Harris $302,000 in 12 monthly payments. Howard took a loan from Virage for those funds, plus some for expenses in unrelated cases. Virage was sending the monthly payments straight to Harris, yet Howard remained ultimately responsible for the money, alleged the petition. The last monthly payment was due April 1.
To get the Virage loan for the $302,000, both lawyers agreed to give Virage a security to perfect a lien on the tobacco cases, the petition said. Virage placed a lien on Howard's 40 percent share of gross fees from those cases. Harris was supposed to be prosecuting and litigating the cases using his best efforts to get an award in the cases, the petition said.
There was a multimillion-dollar verdict in one of the tobacco cases in February 2019. Now that the cases seemed to be producing fees, Harris allegedly “concocted a bizarre interpretation” of the agreement, saying that after May 1, Howard and Virage's rights in his cases would expire. Virage replied to Harris that Howard's interests in the fees never expired under the agreement.
“It has become clear that Harris does not intend to abide by the plain language of the settlement agreement he struck, trying instead to re-trade the deal through contract constructions entirely divorced from reality,” said the petition.
Howard and his firm are asking the court for a declaratory judgment regarding the settlement agreement, including the 60-40 split between Harris and Howard, and the lack of any expiration date of Howard's interests. Howard also seeks to recover costs, attorney fees and expenses.
The previous lawsuit in Florida claimed Harris brought his former co-counsel a portfolio of about 150 Engle progeny cases resulting from the landmark Engle decision that stemmed from a 1994 Florida case by six sick Florida smokers against the nation's largest cigarette manufacturers. According to the lawsuit, Howard lacked the funds to finance the venture. It alleges Howard used the potentially valuable litigation portfolio to leverage millions in loans without Harris' consent. Harris also filed a complaint against Howard with the Florida Bar Association.
Harris said in an interview that he denies all of the allegations in Howard's lawsuit in Texas.
“It's a frivolous lawsuit and I'm going to seek sanctions against him,” he said.
The fee-sharing agreement is “totally unenforceable,” Harris said, because attorney disciplinary rules state that a client must approve of lawyers' fee-sharing agreements, which didn't happen here. He said he worked with Howard as co-counsel from January 2018 to November 2018, when Howard's firm collapsed, then Virage “bailed him out” and agreed to pay Harris for his work as co-counsel. Harris said he agreed “under duress” because he hadn't been paid in months and was living with the help of friends and family. His suit in Florida alleges Howard “usurped” a portfolio of tobacco cases.
“He promised me something that ended up being too good to be true: He offered a lucrative salary and benefits, which I wasn't earning at the time—I was simply trying to finance and prosecute very expensive tobacco cases out of my own pocket,” Harris said. “He then stole my case list, went around the country using it as collateral to bilk creditors out of their money, including Virage, and how he's trying to enforce a provision in the agreement in which I agreed to divide with him the fees.”
Howard didn't respond to a call or email seeking comment, and his attorney, Ashish Mahendru of Houston's Mahendru PC, didn't immediately provide a comment when reached by email.
Read Howard's full complaint here: [falcon-embed src="embed_1"]
And here's Harris' suit filed in Florida: [falcon-embed src="embed_2"]
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 All2024 Marked Growth On Top of Growth for Law Firm Litigation Practices. Is a Cooldown in the Offing for 2025?
Big Company Insiders See Technology-Related Disputes Teed Up for 2025
Litigation Leaders: Jason Leckerman of Ballard Spahr on Growing the Department by a Third Via Merger with Lane Powell
Trending Stories
- 15th Circuit Considers Challenge to Louisiana's Ten Commandments Law
- 2Crocs Accused of Padding Revenue With Channel-Stuffing HEYDUDE Shoes
- 3E-discovery Practitioners Are Racing to Adapt to Social Media’s Evolving Landscape
- 4The Law Firm Disrupted: For Office Policies, Big Law Has Its Ear to the Market, Not to Trump
- 5FTC Finalizes Child Online Privacy Rule Updates, But Ferguson Eyes Further Changes
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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