WORLD Law Direct Forums
Home > WORLD Law Direct Forums > FORUM INFORMATION > Law News > Spurned Associate’s Suit Against Orrick Still Alive

Spurned Associate’s Suit Against Orrick Still Alive

This is a discussion on Spurned Associate’s Suit Against Orrick Still Alive within the Law News forum, part of the FORUM INFORMATION category; To many associates in BigLaw, Patrick Hoeffner may have gained folk hero status in 2006 when he filed suit against ...

Consult Your Own Personal Lawyer Now!
Reply

 

Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old May 1st, 2009, 12:40 PM   #1
News
 
WSJ_law_blog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,438

Default Spurned Associate’s Suit Against Orrick Still Alive



To many associates in BigLaw, Patrick Hoeffner may have gained folk hero status in 2006 when he filed suit against Orrick, claiming the firm shafted him when it declined to make him partner.

Click here for an LB post on the suit, which claimed that Orrick promised to make Hoeffner partner, because it allegedly feared the former intellectual-property associate was heading to Chadbourne & Parke and taking mad business with him.

Orrick at the time called the suit baseless. In 2008, a New York trial court partially granted a motion for summary judgment dismissing the suit.

Yesterday, a New York appellate court reinstated Hoeffner’s claim that he was induced to remain at Orrick with the promise of partnership. (HT to the Legal Profession Blog.)

“Plaintiff’s alleged reliance on the individual defendants’ statements concerning the partnership process at the law firm and plaintiff’s partnership prospects was not unreasonable as a matter of law,” the appellate court held in its ruling. “He was an associate with no experience in applying for partnership at the firm.”

Orrick’s lawyer, Gerard Harper at Paul Weiss, emphasizes that the appellate court upheld the lower court’s dismissal of other claims by Hoeffner. As far as damages, Hoeffner at most will be entitled to the “the difference between what Orrick actually paid him and the outstanding offer from Chadbourne, which he turned down to stay at Orrick,” Harper says. “That number is south of $60,000. That’s like the cost of a couple of depositions in today’s world.”

Hoeffner’s “economic damages are limited to $60,000,” his lawyer, Douglas Wigdor says. “But the other half of the story is that Mr. Hoeffner is entitled to uncapped punitive damages, which we believes will be in the millions of dollars.” Wigdor says that Hoeffner is still practicing law, though he did not know where. “Had he gotten what he was promised at Orrick, he’d be earning substantially more money than he is earning now.”





WSJ_law_blog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmark & Share



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

| More

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Format Your Messages
Add Forum to Google Toolbar
Forum Jump

Similar Threads

Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Orrick Gives the Boot to Lockstep-Associate Model WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Jul 1st, 2009 12:40 PM
Mistakes By Prosecutors Alive and Well; Few Punished WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Apr 16th, 2009 11:20 AM
Mass. Agency Dismisses Associate’s Holiday-Party Drugging Claim WSJ_law_blog Law News 0 Apr 14th, 2009 02:00 PM
In a snakepit being eaten up alive DianeJessica Other Criminal Law Matters 3 Oct 18th, 2007 10:45 AM
Coudert jeopardises Orrick Unregistered International Law Issues 1 Feb 12th, 2007 11:36 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 AM.