Davis Polk, Sullivan & Cromwell Guide US Treasury on COVID-19 Air Carrier Relief
Davis Polk's contract came with a supplement that confronted issues involving conflicts of interest—any situation where the firm might continue to represent, or pick up a new client, with interests adverse to the U.S. Treasury Department.
May 04, 2020 at 11:19 AM
4 minute read
The veteran Wall Street law firms Davis Polk & Wardwell and Sullivan & Cromwell have signed contracts worth $650,000 each to provide legal advisory services to the U.S. Treasury Department as it sorts out relief to air carriers amid the coronavirus pandemic, joining Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton as a federal contractor in the virus era.
U.S. Treasury officials said last month that they were working with Cleary Gottlieb on financial matters involving air carriers. Cleary's contract, also valued at $650,000, mirrored those signed on May 1 by Davis Polk and Sullivan & Cromwell lawyers. The contracts run for six weeks.
The Davis Polk team includes New York partners Randall Guynn, John Banes and Jim Florack, according to the contract. Guynn leads Davis Polk's financial institutions group, and Florack is the co-head of the global finance group. Davis Polk's contract says the firm will provide legal services.
Sullivan & Cromwell's contract identified the lead partners as Sergio Galvis, Inosi Nyatta and Benjamin Weiner. Galvis is a member of the firm's management committee and oversees recruitment. Nyatta jointly leads the firm's global project development and finance practice. The contract requires the firm to provide "legal advisory services for loan and financial assistance agreements under the CARES Act."
The Davis Polk and Sullivan & Cromwell lawyers were not immediately reached for comment.
Both contracts said the firms "may be tasked with providing expert advice and guidance with respect to loans, equity investments, and other direct or indirect investments; developing legal documentation with respect to loans, equity investments, and other direct or indirect investments; negotiating relevant transactions; and performing related legal services within the general contract scope."
Davis Polk's contract came with a supplement that confronted issues involving conflicts of interest—any situation where the firm might continue to represent, or pick up a new client, with interests adverse to the U.S. Treasury Department. The supplement served to waive any objection by the federal government to Davis Polk representing a corporation or other client against the Treasury Department.
"The contractor also represents and in the future will represent a large number of other clients in a wide variety of legal matters. Some such clients may have interests that are contrary to the client's interests," the supplement said. "It is possible that, during the time the contractor is working for the client, an existing or future client may seek to engage the contractor in connection with an actual or potential transaction or pending or potential litigation or other dispute resolution proceeding in which such client's interests are or potentially may become adverse to the client's interests."
The U.S. Treasury, per the terms of the contract, "consents to, and waives any objection with respect to, such adverse representations." Treasury is not allowed to argue that Davis Polk should be disqualified from representing such a client whose interests are not aligned with the U.S. government's interests.
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 AllTrump Picks Personal Criminal Defense Lawyers for Solicitor General, Deputy Attorney General
'Health Care Behemoth'?: DOJ Seeks Injunction Blocking $3.3B UnitedHealth Merger Proposal
3 minute readFreshfields Hires DOJ Official, Squire Taps Paul Hastings Atty for US Antitrust Head
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 2Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 3US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 4Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 5McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
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