Phila. Lawyer Sues Pierce Bainbridge Founder Over Fees From Video Game Suit
Philadelphia attorney Bruce Chasan claims John Pierce and his fast-growing firm acted in bad faith by failing to finalize a $160,000 settlement.
December 17, 2018 at 03:29 PM
4 minute read
A Philadelphia lawyer is suing Los Angeles litigation boutique Pierce Bainbridge Beck Price & Hecht, alleging that the firm acted in bad faith by failing to follow through with a $160,000 settlement for attorney fees.
Solo attorney Bruce Chasan filed his complaint Dec. 14 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against litigator John Pierce and Pierce Bainbridge, where Pierce is a founder and managing partner.
Pierce, a former partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, Latham & Watkins and K&L Gates, founded Pierce Sergenian in early 2017 with David Sergenian, who has since left. Despite a couple of departures and name changes in quick succession, the firm has grown quickly. Pierce has said he expects that within the next five to seven years, “we're going to replace Quinn Emanuel as the next dominant global litigation firm, no question.”
According to Chasan's complaint, former pro footballer and wrestler Lenwood Hamilton engaged Chasan's firm in December 2016 to represent him in a lawsuit against Epic Games, Lester Speight and Microsoft. Hamilton had alleged that his likeness and voice were used in the video game “Gears of War,” bringing right-of-publicity and other claims. That case is ongoing.
Chasan's representation of Hamilton was intended to be on a contingent fee basis, the complaint said, except that Hamilton would be required to pay Chasan $450 per hour if he terminated the representation before the underlying litigation resolved.
Chasan looked for a third party to fund the litigation, as Hamilton did not provide enough to pay for all the required expenses, the complaint said. And in March 2018, Chasan met Pierce Bainbridge's Pierce, the complaint said.
“Chasan proposed to Pierce that if Pierce could provide funding for Hamilton's right of publicity case, and assist in the litigation, he would split any recovery of a contingent fee with Pierce's law firm on a 50-50 basis,” the complaint said.
Chasan, Hamilton and Pierce met March 20 to discuss the joint representation, the complaint said, and about a week later, Hamilton terminated Chasan as his lawyer, retaining Pierce instead. The next day, Chasan emailed Pierce to say Hamilton was liable for attorney fees to Chasan of about $320,000.
About a month later, Pierce told Chasan via email that Hamilton was planning to file “'a multimillion-dollar, eight-figure legal malpractice action against you,” and suggesting they try to reach a settlement. The settlement negotiations began in May, the complaint said, and continued until September.
According to Chasan's suit, he accepted a $160,000 settlement offer via email in September.
But in late October, when Pierce's partner Jim Bainbridge sent a final copy of the settlement agreement, it included a change—Hamilton would not be releasing Chasan or his firm from future claims, Chasan's complaint said.
“Evidently, Hamilton was not willing to release his potential malpractice claims. Chasan had not expected that Hamilton would balk at signing a release,” the complaint said.
Chasan sent Bainbridge a memo and revised settlement agreement in mid-November, the complaint said, which would remove Hamilton as a party to the agreement. But Pierce and his firm have not accepted that proposed settlement.
“Pierce and [his firm] should not be permitted to rely on Hamilton's refusal to sign a release as a basis for avoiding the settlement they proposed,” Chasan's complaint said.
Chasan asked the court to enter judgment in the amount of $160,000 plus interest, costs and expenses.
Pierce said in a statement Monday that he plans to contest Chasan's claims vigorously.
“His shameless attempt to capitalize on the incredible, international press coverage regarding Mr. Hamilton's lawsuit, as well as another recently filed suit against Epic Games, will not distract us from our duty to our client. We look forward to prevailing on our client's claims against Microsoft and Epic,” Pierce said.
READ MORE:
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 AllMorgan Lewis Snatches Up Former Orrick Partner in Boston
Attorney Claims Phila. Roundup Trial Schedule Has Given 'Unfair' Preference to Certain Firms
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Law Firm Accused of Barratry for Allegedly Soliciting Crash Victims
- 2Carlton Fields Downsizes in Move to New Atlanta Office
- 3Trump's Selection of Zeldin to Head EPA Draws Surprise, Little Hope of Avoiding Deregulation
- 4Against the Odds: Voters Elect Woody Clermont to the Broward Judicial Bench
- 5US Supreme Court Justices Pass on Landlord Challenge to NY Rent Stabilization
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