Wilson Sonsini Sued by Ex-Clients Who Seek to Halt $480K Fees Arbitration
The former clients said Wilson Sonsini deceived them to get their consent to arbitrate over fees and failed to alert them as costs mounted.
April 17, 2019 at 05:42 PM
3 minute read
A group of Israeli real estate investors sued Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati on Thursday in an effort to stop an arbitration initiated by the firm over $480,000 in unpaid legal fees. The former clients claim Wilson Sonsini tricked them into signing an engagement letter with the firm and then blew past billing benchmarks.
The investors' suit, filed in Manhattan Supreme Court by Rafael Barouch Elkaim and his co-plaintiffs, seeks to halt an arbitration that Wilson Sonsini initiated last month against them over unpaid fees.
The four men hired Wilson Sonsini last year on behalf of dozens of investors who alleged in a separate lawsuit that they were defrauded out of $20 million by two Brooklyn real estate developers. Most of that suit had been sent to arbitration by the time the four men reached out to Wilson Sonsini. Elkaim said he resisted signing a Wilson Sonsini engagement agreement until law firm partner Moe Fodeman assured him that “all attorneys” required fee disputes be arbitrated.
“Had petitioners been aware that Fodeman's description of the universal practice of New York attorneys to include arbitration provisions in their engagement letters was false, they would not have agreed to the arbitration provision or entered into the engagement agreement,” the suit said.
Elkaim and his fellow investors said Wilson Sonsini started working on their case in April 2018 and gave them the engagement agreement in May, which said it was “contemplated” that the firm would use an initial retainer of $100,000 on pre-litigation research into the facts and law of their real estate dispute. The retainer was paid later that month, and in June, Wilson Sonsini met with three of the men to discuss the firm's analysis.
At that meeting, the lawsuit against the firm alleges, one of the plaintiffs, Binyomin Halpern, took Fodeman aside and told him to not do more than $200,000 in billable work until he could give an estimate for what work was left to be done. Later that month, however, it was revealed that Wilson Sonsini billed $161,000 in May alone, and by the end of June, the firm had racked up more than $400,000 in fees, the lawsuit claims.
The plaintiffs said they believe the arbitration agreement was meant “to hide [Wilson Sonsini's] billing shenanigans from the public record.” They filed the engagement agreement and Wilson Sonsini's demand for arbitration as exhibits to their suit; they show that the firm agreed to a 10 percent discount that brought its lead partners' hourly rates to $865 and $880 per hour.
Yitzchak Eliezer Soloveichik, a lawyer at Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman who represents the plaintiffs, didn't respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for Wilson Sonsini declined to discuss the allegations in detail, saying his firm would do so in court.
“We don't comment on ongoing litigation,” the spokesman said. “Nevertheless, we're going to aggressively defend and contest the allegations.”
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 AllPaul Hastings, Recruiting From Davis Polk, Adds Capital Markets Attorney
3 minute readNeighboring States Have Either Passed or Proposed Climate Superfund Laws—Is Pennsylvania Next?
7 minute readTrending Stories
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