Boies Schiller Cleared to Keep Billionaire Ex-Client's File Amid Fee Dispute
With a New York state court ruling on Friday, Boies Schiller can continue hanging onto a discovery file that serves as leverage while the firm tries to recover more than $825,000 in unpaid fees from a billionaire former client.
October 12, 2018 at 02:52 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
A New York state judge sided on Friday with Boies Schiller Flexner, declining to force the firm to turn over discovery documents to a former client, Russian-Canadian billionaire Alex Shnaider, who owes the firm a little shy of $1 million in legal fees.
Shnaider, now represented by Kasowitz Benson Torres, had submitted a petition in Manhattan state court on Wednesday looking for a temporary restraining order, and later an injunction. Shnaider's petition effectively asked the court to order the return of his client file in an underlying lawsuit in New York federal court, which pits the billionaire against his former business partner in a venture to sell private jets.
A Boies Schiller team led by partners Nicholas Gravante Jr. and Karen Dyer had been defending Shnaider in the jet litigation for more than two years. But, in late August, the firm asked to withdraw from the case, citing “irreconcilable differences with Mr. Shnaider regarding the payment of BSF's legal fees.”
At a hearing in Manhattan on Friday, Gravante told New York Supreme Court Justice Debra James that Shnaider owes Boies Schiller some $825,000 plus interest. In light of the unpaid fees, the firm has asserted a retaining lien on Shnaider's client file that includes discovery material from the jet lawsuit. Otherwise, Gravante said, “the likelihood that we will recover our fees is almost nil.”
A trial is scheduled in the jet case for early December. The Kasowitz lawyers—who represent Shnaider in the underlying federal lawsuit and in the state court proceedings against Boies Schiller—have argued that with less than two months to go before that trial, Shnaider won't be able to adequately mount a defense without the client file from Boies Schiller.
Kasowitz associate Michael Beck, who was in court representing Shnaider, told James that the file includes documents compiled in response to interrogatory requests and other discovery material. Not having access to the file, he said, deprives Shnaider's legal team of important information relevant to his defense.
“We'll go into this essentially blind,” Beck said.
Earlier in the hearing, James asked the two sides if they had discussed any sort of deal that might resolve the issue.
In response, Gravante said Boies Schiller would be willing to hand over the client file if Shnaider and his lawyers agreed to put the money he owes into an escrow account until the fee dispute is fully resolved. But Beck said his client wasn't willing to make that kind of deal at this point.
The judge ultimately sided with Boies Schiller. James denied Shnaider's request for a temporary restraining order, reasoning, in part, that such an order would typically be handed down to “maintain the status quo.” Here, however, Shnaider was looking for more than that, she said.
The decision was not a final resolution. The judge went on to set some additional deadlines—Boies Schiller would have until Oct. 23 to file a response opposing Shnaider's petition and, if necessary, Shnaider could reply to that by Oct. 26. Another hearing was set for Oct. 29.
But James also indicated that she'd rather not have to hold further proceedings, imploring the two sides to resolve their dispute beforehand.
“I'd really urge the parties to craft some sort of compromise,” the judge said.
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 AllMore Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'Think About Why You Want the Role, Because It Is Not an Easy Job,' Says Aaron Rubin of Morrison Foerster
- 2People in the News—Nov. 22, 2024—Marshall Dennehey, Buchanan Ingersoll
- 3$83M Verdict After $100K Demand Rejected in Henry County
- 4Samsung Flooded With Galaxy Product Patent Lawsuits in Texas Federal Court
- 5How Marsh McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
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