Towers Watson Delaware's lawsuit against Morgan, Lewis & Bockius over alleged client conflicts has mostly survived, though claims against an individual lawyer were dismissed.

In an order Wednesday, Judge Patricia McInerney of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas overruled all but one of Morgan Lewis' preliminary objections to the Towers complaint, which claims over $30 million in damages. With regard to the firm's other objection, McInerney dismissed a breach of contract claim against Morgan Lewis partner Jeremy Blumenfeld.

Towers used Morgan Lewis as litigation counsel on various cases beginning in 2009. In its complaint, Towers has alleged that Morgan Lewis used its knowledge of the company to help one of Towers' retirement plan users, Meriter Health Services, sue Towers.

Morgan Lewis argued that Towers' complaint fails to state a claim for breach of contract or breach of fiduciary duty.

The law firm said Towers consented to Morgan Lewis representing adverse parties in 2010, when their relationship began. And they reaffirmed that waiver of conflicts in 2012, Morgan Lewis said, after the law firm began representing Meriter.

The firm also argued that Blumenfeld should not be a defendant, since he was a partner of the firm rather than an individual party to any client contracts.

According to the court filing, the engagement letter between Morgan Lewis and Towers said the law firm “would be permitted to represent clients 'in any matter, including litigation, that is not substantially related to our work for Towers Watson, even if the interests of such clients in those other matters are directly adverse to Towers Watson.'”

While Morgan Lewis defended Meriter in an Employee Retirement Income Security Act class action, the firm's filing said, it was not involved in Meriter's lawsuit against Towers. In that suit, Meriter alleged that Towers' negligence in providing professional services contributed to Meriter's liability in the ERISA action. Towers had knowledge that Morgan Lewis previously represented Meriter in the ERISA case, Morgan Lewis said, because Towers was subpoenaed in the ERISA case.

Towers has acknowledged that Meriter hired another law firm—referred to in the complaint as “Law Firm 2″—to sue Towers. But the complaint alleged that Blumenfeld proceeded to review documents from Towers in order to evaluate Meriter's claims against Towers.

Towers also alleged that Morgan Lewis communicated regularly with Law Firm 2. That firm is not identified in the complaint or Morgan Lewis' filings, but court records show that Nixon Peabody and Gass Weber Mullins represented Meriter.

Meriter and Towers settled in June. The terms were confidential, but Towers has alleged that by assisting Law Firm 2, Morgan Lewis caused Towers to lose more than $25 million, in addition to legal fees already paid.

William Trask of Sprague & Sprague, who is representing Towers, said, “Morgan Lewis isn't entitled to rely on a vague waiver, and it's an unarticulated assumption that Towers ought to or would figure out what Morgan Lewis was doing behind their back.”

A spokeswoman for Morgan Lewis did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

The case is expected to go to trial in December 2018.

Towers Watson Delaware's lawsuit against Morgan, Lewis & Bockius over alleged client conflicts has mostly survived, though claims against an individual lawyer were dismissed.

In an order Wednesday, Judge Patricia McInerney of the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas overruled all but one of Morgan Lewis' preliminary objections to the Towers complaint, which claims over $30 million in damages. With regard to the firm's other objection, McInerney dismissed a breach of contract claim against Morgan Lewis partner Jeremy Blumenfeld.

Towers used Morgan Lewis as litigation counsel on various cases beginning in 2009. In its complaint, Towers has alleged that Morgan Lewis used its knowledge of the company to help one of Towers' retirement plan users, Meriter Health Services, sue Towers.

Morgan Lewis argued that Towers' complaint fails to state a claim for breach of contract or breach of fiduciary duty.

The law firm said Towers consented to Morgan Lewis representing adverse parties in 2010, when their relationship began. And they reaffirmed that waiver of conflicts in 2012, Morgan Lewis said, after the law firm began representing Meriter.

The firm also argued that Blumenfeld should not be a defendant, since he was a partner of the firm rather than an individual party to any client contracts.

According to the court filing, the engagement letter between Morgan Lewis and Towers said the law firm “would be permitted to represent clients 'in any matter, including litigation, that is not substantially related to our work for Towers Watson, even if the interests of such clients in those other matters are directly adverse to Towers Watson.'”

While Morgan Lewis defended Meriter in an Employee Retirement Income Security Act class action, the firm's filing said, it was not involved in Meriter's lawsuit against Towers. In that suit, Meriter alleged that Towers' negligence in providing professional services contributed to Meriter's liability in the ERISA action. Towers had knowledge that Morgan Lewis previously represented Meriter in the ERISA case, Morgan Lewis said, because Towers was subpoenaed in the ERISA case.

Towers has acknowledged that Meriter hired another law firm—referred to in the complaint as “Law Firm 2″—to sue Towers. But the complaint alleged that Blumenfeld proceeded to review documents from Towers in order to evaluate Meriter's claims against Towers.

Towers also alleged that Morgan Lewis communicated regularly with Law Firm 2. That firm is not identified in the complaint or Morgan Lewis' filings, but court records show that Nixon Peabody and Gass Weber Mullins represented Meriter.

Meriter and Towers settled in June. The terms were confidential, but Towers has alleged that by assisting Law Firm 2, Morgan Lewis caused Towers to lose more than $25 million, in addition to legal fees already paid.

William Trask of Sprague & Sprague, who is representing Towers, said, “Morgan Lewis isn't entitled to rely on a vague waiver, and it's an unarticulated assumption that Towers ought to or would figure out what Morgan Lewis was doing behind their back.”

A spokeswoman for Morgan Lewis did not respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

The case is expected to go to trial in December 2018.