Litigators of the Week: Houston Lawyers Convince Advertising Consultant To Drop Claim Against Law Firm
When Houston mass tort lawyer Clayton Clark was sued over an advertising contract dispute, he went looking for the best trial counsel he could find and choose two from either side of the bar to represent him: plaintiff lawyer Jim Perdue Jr. and defense attorney Alistair Dawson.
May 14, 2018 at 12:05 PM
5 minute read
When Houston mass tort lawyer Clayton Clark was sued over an advertising contract dispute, he went looking for the best trial counsel he could find and choose two from either side of the bar to represent him: plaintiffs lawyer Jim Perdue Jr. and defense attorney Alistair Dawson.
And that pair turned out to be a formidable combination because, when it came time to try the case on May 2 after three years of litigation, the plaintiff didn't bother to show up at the Harris County courthouse, sending his attorneys in his stead to nonsuit the case.
“It was a lot of fun to work with people that I respect and it was an honor to bring it to a head. It would have been a heck of a case to try,'' said Perdue, a partner in Houston's Perdue & Kidd who is a personal injury attorney.
Dawson also regretted that the case settled because he'd always wanted to try a case with Perdue, who he counts as a good friend.
“It's the first time we've worked together,” said Dawson, a partner in Houston's Beck Redden who defends businesses in commercial litigation. “We brought different skills to the table, and I was really disappointed we didn't get to trial because I really wanted to watch Jim and work with him.''
Their client, Clayton Clark and his law firm Clark, Love & Hutson, represent plaintiffs claiming injury from pharmaceutical drugs and devices. Clark and his firm spend substantial money running television advertisements for their legal services. They were sued in 2015 by Keith Cohn, an advertising and marketing consultant who claimed he had an oral contract with Clark—first charging him 15 percent of the advertising cost, which Cohn later reduced to a 12 percent commission.
Cohn claimed that Clark ultimately offered him another deal: if Cohn would reduce the up-front commission to 8 percent, Clark would pay him a bonus worth four times Cohn's normal fee when cases brought in through Cohn's advertising settled.
Cohn also contended that he had a deal to locate investors in Clark's advertising campaigns in exchange for 1 percent of any fees earned by Clark from clients obtained through the advertising campaigns.
But Perdue and Dawson convinced Tad Halbach, judge of Harris County's 333rd District Court, that the finder's fee arrangement that Cohn claimed he had with Clark was illegal because attorneys are not allowed to split their fees with non-lawyers—a ruling that survived an appeal to Houston's First Court of Appeal in 2016.
And Perdue and Dawson later submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law that the changing deals Cohn supposedly had with Clark didn't make any business sense, and that the oral deal never happened.
“The plaintiff claims the oral contract was formed on Nov. 1, 2010, at Mr. Clark's office here in Houston. And what they didn't know was Mr. Clark wasn't in his office that day and wasn't even in Houston. So, our first position was there wasn't any agreement,” Dawson said.
“And the proposed agreement makes no sense,” Dawson said of the argument that Clark owed him $1.8 million in advertising bonuses.
“What he was saying was: 'I normally would charge you 12 percent commission. I agree to reduce it to 8 percent, and you agreed to give me a bonus of 48 percent when the cases settle.' If you do the math and spend, say, $100,000 on advertising, he would normally get $12,000 in commission. He agrees to cut it to $8,000, but in the end he's going to get $48,000?” Dawson said. “No sane, rational person would make that deal, and Mr. Clark did not make that deal.''
Cohn was ultimately paid $750,000 by Clark based on a flat fee, Perdue said.
“I think our proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law let them know they were in an impossible situation,” Perdue added.
Perdue noted that less than two weeks before the May 2 trial day, the plaintiff asked for a delay after realizing they had not made a jury demand in their case—a motion that was denied.
“We were pushing for a trial, and they kept throwing furniture in front of the freight train that just kept coming,'' Perdue said.
And on the May 2 trial date, Cohn's lawyers agreed to dismiss his case with prejudice in exchange for Clark dropping a declaratory judgment motion seeking the court to declare their deal never existed.
John Neese, an attorney with Houston's Meade & Neese who represents Cohn, did not return a call for comment.
“I'm pleased for my client and with the result,'' Dawson said. “I wanted to try the case, but they offered victory so you've got to take victory.''
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 AllHomegrown Texas Law Firms Expanded Outside the Lone Star State in 2024 As Out-of-State Firms Moved In
5 minute readEnergy Lawyers Working in Texas Expect Strong Demand to Continue in 2025 Across Energy Sector
6 minute readHouston Appeals Court Split Over Race Discrimination Suit Involving COVID-19 Vaccine Distribution
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 2Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 3Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
- 4'Almost an Arms Race': California Law Firms Scooped Up Lateral Talent by the Handful in 2024
- 5Pittsburgh Judge Rules Loan Company's Online Arbitration Agreement Unenforceable
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