Beginning Next Week: InsideCounsel will become part of Corporate Counsel. Bringing these two industry-leading websites together will now give you comprehensive coverage of the full spectrum of issues affecting today's General Counsel at companies of all sizes. You will continue to receive expert analysis on key issues including corporate litigation, labor developments, tech initiatives and intellectual property, as well as Women, Influence & Power in Law (WIPL) professional development content. Plus we'll be serving all ALM legal publications from one interconnected platform, powered by Law.com, giving you easy access to additional relevant content from other InsideCounsel sister publications.

To prevent a disruption in service, you will be automatically redirected to the new site next week. Thank you for being a valued InsideCounsel reader!

X

More On

Tyco settlement lawyers say $464 million fee was out of their control

Lawsuit claims a contract dictates firm should have received $187 million less

Lawyers at the Delaware firm Grant & Eisenhofer (G&E) are learning the true meaning of the phrase “mo’ money, mo’ problems.”

In 2007, G&E negotiated a $3.2 billion settlement on behalf of a group of shareholders against the global manufacturing company Tyco International Ltd. The shareholders, the Teachers Retirement System of Louisiana (TRSL), had signed a contract with the firm in 2004 that would cap fees at 8.7 percent of the total recovery. But when both sides reached a settlement three years later, the court awarded G&E and other law firms involved in the case 14.5 percent, or $464 million. A Tyco shareholder and former G&E lawyer, John Gielata, is now suing G&E, claiming the firm never disclosed the agreement to the court.

In a court filing yesterday, G&E rebuffed the allegations, saying the fee is valid because TRSL asked two retired federal judges for a fee recommendation when some of the class counsel were seeking fees of up to 17.5 percent. Additionally, the firm claims it had a verbal agreement with TRSL that the 2004 contract would be void if the two sides couldn’t reach a quick settlement.

“It would be manifestly unjust, as well as lacking in any legal basis, to deprive lead plaintiff TRSL of its flexibility in this respect, or to hold G&E responsible for a result over which it had no control,” G&E lawyer Sanford I. Weisburst said in the court filing.

According to Forbes, Gielata’s suit might not have legs given the fact that the same court approved the fee in the first place and threw out a similar challenge last year. 

Ashley Post

Bio and more articles

Join the Conversation

Advertisement. Closing in 15 seconds.