Monday, January 29, 2007
LECLAIR RYAN WINS $60M POWER PLANT CASE FOR OWNER
Representing the owner of a $250M power plant project against a large general contractor, LeClair Ryan attorneys Tom Wolf and John Craddock prevailed in a three-week trial in federal court. The court awarded LeClair Ryan’s client more than $11M in damages, plus 100% of their attorney’s fees. In addition, the court ruled against the general contractor on every one of its numerous counterclaims totaling more than $50M. The case involved more than 2,000,000 pages of documents and more than 2,000 trial exhibits. Wolf says that prevailing in the battle of experts was key to his client’s victory. “The contractor used four very well credentialed and highly paid experts. We were able to demonstrate that each of them significantly overreached in his opinions. Our experts kept their opinions simple and well grounded in the facts. We won the credibility battle hands down.”
Monday, January 15, 2007
CLIENTS EXPECT TO PAY BIGGER BILLS IN 2007
New York Lawyer - January 12, 2007 - By Jessie Seyfer
SAR-BOX DRIVING LEGAL WORK TO OUTSIDE COUNSEL
In what may be a reflection of corporate America's cautious stance on legal matters, more in-house legal staffs across the country report that they will be hiring outside firms to do increased work this year.
A survey released Tuesday by the Association of Corporate Counsel found that 25 percent of in-house counsel planned on increasing their use of outside counsel, up from 16 percent last year. However, 53 percent of the 848 corporate attorneys surveyed said the amount of legal work they planned to send out would not change.
The ACC survey did not ask attorneys why many companies are stepping up their outside legal work. But local legal recruiters and in-house counsel pointed to Sarbanes-Oxley as the chief culprit. "The main reason for it is the increased burden relating to corporate governance and how it might impact both private and public companies," said Fritz Koehler, general counsel for the Sunnyvale, Calif., semiconductor company eSilicon. "For recent changes in things like compensation disclosure rules, companies thinking they might one day go public may need to seek legal advice. Public companies have to do the same thing."
Martha Fay Africa, of the Major, Lindsey & Africa recruiting firm, believes the increase in outside legal work shows companies are bouncing their decisions off other attorneys so as to spread the responsibility around.
FEAR SELLS
"Right now we're existing in a climate of fear," Africa said. "Everyone's wondering who's going to get hit next with backdating, fraud, any of the kinds of things that have been happening. ... So we have here a climate where people are saying, 'Who can I trust?' That's clearly revealed in this survey." Companies want to be "bulletproof," she said.
New government regulations, such as those addressing e-discovery, have convinced many companies to invest in document-retention technology as well.
In addition, 45 percent of the attorneys surveyed, from both private and public companies, reported that "document management" technology had made their work more efficient and cost-effective. Also, corporate compliance was ranked second in terms of areas where in-house legal work was expected to expand this year, behind transactional work.
LEGAL FEES ARE NOT A FACTOR!
The ACC survey also looked into why some in-house counsel had fired their outside firms. Thirty-two percent had jettisoned their outside counsel, and 8 percent of that number reported it was because of cost. Just over 7 percent said it was because of mishandling of one or more critical matters, and 63 percent declined to state why. Less than 1 percent fired their outside firm because of a lack of diversity at the firm.
SNELL BRINGS JURY IN FOR FORD ON $18M CAR WRECK CLAIM
Despite one dead and another seriously injured passenger in a rollover accident, a jury found for Ford Motor Company after a four month trial. Snell & Wilmer attorneys Dan Rodman and Hoot Gibson represented Ford.
Plaintiffs sought $18M (including $5M in punitive damages) alleging manufacturing and design defects in a 1995 Ford Aerostar minivan that crashed and overturned after tread separated on its left rear tire. The jury also rejected claims that the van's roof design was defective and that Ford failed to warn the public of the car’s alleged defects.
Six passengers were in the minivan when it rolled 4 times, ejecting one passenger and fracturing the spine of another. The driver suffered minor injuries. The other three passengers were not hurt.
Plaintiffs claimed that a defect in a component of the van's rear suspension led to the crash by breaking prior to the accident causing the tire to blow out resulting in the van swerving to the right, going off the road and rolling over. Plaintiffs also claimed that the van's roof was too weak and crushed inward during the rollover, causing injuries.
Whether the injured passenger was wearing a seat belt was a question disputed by Ford.
Medical bills stemming from the crash allegedly are close to $300,000, and future medical care allegedly will cost $4M.
BLAKES DEFEATS ATTEMPT TO SET ASIDE $90M+ INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION AWARD
Joel Richler, Seumas Woods and Brad Cran of Blake Cassels, the Network's Canada member firm, defeated an attempt in Ontario's Superior Court to set aside an arbitration award Blakes won on behalf of its client, MPI Technologies under Ontario's International Commercial Arbitration Act and the UNCITRAL Model Law. MPI's award was for unpaid royalties under a 1994 license agreement and damages for unauthorized use of confidential information or breach of copyright in software licensed under that agreement.
Arbitration awards under the International Commercial Arbitration Act and the Model Law are not appealable, whether on questions of fact or law. However, awards can be set aside on very limited grounds, primarily where a panel exceeds its jurisdiction or where there is a fundamental denial of due process or a breach of the rules of natural justice.
Justice Campbell of the Superior Court reaffirmed the rule that properly constituted and conducted arbitration proceedings will be accorded a great deal of deference by reviewing courts and that any party seeking to overturn an international arbitration decision will have to overcome a “powerful presumption” that the arbitral tribunal acted within its powers.
Blakes represented the MPI parties, both at the arbitration and on the application.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
EIGHT GOODELL DeVRIES ATTORNEYS NAMED SUPER LAWYERS
Goodell, DeVries, Leech & Dann is pleased to announce that eight of its attorneys have been selected as "Super Lawyers" by Maryland Super Lawyers, a publication of Law & Politics. Three of our eight made the "Tops" list, they are: Donald L. DeVries, Jr. who is named as one of the Top 10 Maryland Super Lawyers and also recognized as a leader in the area of Personal Injury Defense: Medical Malpractice; Susan T. Preston who is named as one of the Top 50 Super Lawyers and one of the Top 25 Women Super Lawyers and is also recognized as a leader in the area of Personal Injury Defense: Medical Malpractice; and Linda S. Woolf who is named one of the Top 25 Women Super Lawyers and is also recognized as a leader in the area of Business Litigation. Additionally, Charlie P. Goodell, Jr., Rick M. Barnes, and Thomas J. Cullen, Jr. are named Super Lawyer in the Personal Injury Defense: Products area. Craig B. Merkle is named a Super Lawyer in the area of Personal Injury Defense: Medical Malpractice and Thomas V. Monahan, Jr. is named a Super Lawyer in the area of Civil Litigation Defense.
