Judge Boots Plaintiffs Firm From Uber Case Over Former Chamber Lawyer's Conflict
A federal judge in San Francisco found that Warren Postman's work alongside Uber while at the Chamber in a lawsuit challenging a Seattle ordinance disqualified him from suing the company in a case he found "substantially related."
January 09, 2019 at 08:12 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge has disqualified the Keller Lenkner law firm from handling a lawsuit against Uber due to one of the firm's lawyer's work alongside the ride-hailing giant as the top appellate counsel at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Warren Postman, who left the U.S. Chamber Litigation Center to join Keller Lenkner as a partner last summer, represented the Chamber as a co-plaintiff alongside Uber in a lawsuit challenging a Seattle ordinance that authorized independent contractor drivers to collectively bargain.
Lawyers at Keller Lenkner had argued Postman never represented Uber as a client, and that he never accessed privileged or confidential Uber information relevant to the case the firm was pursuing on behalf of Studio City-based Diva Limousine Ltd. The livery cab company alleged Uber's classification of its drivers as contractors, rather than employees, violated California labor law and allowed Uber to compete unfairly.
But in a ruling issued Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen of the Northern District of California found that Postman's work on the Seattle case was “extensive” and that there was a substantial relationship between the Seattle case and the one he was pursuing on behalf of Diva.
“The receipt of confidential information is presumed where there is a substantial relationship between two representations,” Chen wrote. “Where an attorney successively represents clients with adverse interests, his disqualification is required under the California Rules of Professional Conduct if 'the subjects of the two representations are substantially related.'”
Chen noted Keller Lenkner and Postman had consulted with independent ethics experts who had opined the lawyer's prior work for the Chamber did not appear to create a conflict. But the judge wrote the firm couldn't point to a case where seeking out such an opinion had protected a firm from disqualification.
“While it may have been prudent for Mr. Postman and KL to seek an ethics consultation before undertaking to represent Diva, unilaterally obtained ethics guidance is not a shield that allows counsel to continue a representation where that representation creates an untenable conflict,” Chen wrote.
Neither Postman nor name partners Ashley Keller and Travis Lenkner immediately responded to emails seeking comment Wednesday.
Uber representatives declined to comment. The company is represented in the case by lawyers at Morgan, Lewis & Bockius.
Read Judge Chen's opinion:
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 All'A Fierce Battle of Expert Witnesses' Expected in Cybersecurity Spat
'That's Insane': Lawyers Weigh In on Fallout From Uber's User Agreement
7 minute readGC Who Helped Fanatics Pull Off Growth Tear Joins Acquisitive Provider of Live Event Logistics
Trending Stories
- 1Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
- 2Cravath Elevates 7 to Partnership, Up From Last Year
- 3Kline & Specter Hit With Lawsuit From Another Former Associate
- 4USPTO Director Kathi Vidal Announces Resignation Ahead of Administration Change
- 5As Gen AI Acceptance Grows, Lawyers Race to Mitigate Risks
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