Nelson Brown Ex-Partner Dispute Sent to Arbitration
In a win for former firm leader Michael Nelson, a federal judge has said his dispute with former partners should be resolved in arbitration or mediation.
February 15, 2019 at 02:32 PM
3 minute read
Former Nelson Brown & Co. leader Michael Nelson's case against his former partners is headed to arbitration, after a federal judge ruled in his favor.
Nelson, now a partner at Eversheds Sutherland in New York, filed the initial complaint in July 2017, two years after leaving the firm, formerly known as Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton.
Nelson has alleged that his former partners were on the hook for a $4 million line of credit the firm had taken out, and that he had to repay a disproportionate amount of that loan, an amended complaint filed in 2017 said. Nelson also alleged that his ex-partners took advance draws when they left the firm, which ultimately exceeded their distributions for 2014, but he did not specify the amount of the excess draws.
In an order Jan. 28, U.S. District Senior Judge John R. Padova for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted Nelson's motion to compel mediation or arbitration.
From the beginning, Nelson has sought to resolve his claims outside of court. According to court documents, before bringing the federal suit, Nelson attempted to initiate an arbitration or mediation in January 2017 by sending notice to the Pennsylvania Bar Association's program administrator.
Padova's opinion said Nelson's motion called for consideration of whether the disputes he described in his complaint fall under the former partners' operating agreement and buy-sell agreement. In those accords, Padova wrote, the parties entered into valid agreements to arbitrate.
Padova rejected all of the defendants' arguments, deciding the Nelson's claims were subject to those agreements. Their arguments included a contention that Nelson waived his right to seek arbitration by engaging in litigation, and that the defunct law firm must be joined, affecting the court's subject matter jurisdiction.
Michael LiPuma, a commercial litigator with a solo practice in Philadelphia, is representing Nelson, court records show. He could not be reached for comment Friday.
Defendants Michael Hamilton, William Krekstein and Claudia McCarron, who are representing themselves in the litigation, did not respond to calls for comment Friday. Daniel DeLuca, who is representing himself and defendant Kenneth Levine, also did not return a call for comment. And Michael Savett of Clark & Fox, who is representing defendant John Clark, did not return a call either.
|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 AllDon’t Settle for the Minimum: Finding Constitutional Claims Closer to Home
7 minute readSeven Rules of the Road for Managing Referrals To/From Other Attorneys, Part 1
7 minute readMatt's Corner: RPC 8.4(d)—Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice
2 minute readTrending Stories
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