Lawyerly Lairs Litigation: Big-Time Journalist v. Biglaw Partner

Prominent legal-affairs journalist versus Weil Gotshal partner: who will prevail?

A prominent television journalist and legal commentator has just launched a legal war against a Biglaw partner (as we noted in Morning Docket). And it made the pages of the New York Post:

ABC News chief legal analyst Dan Abrams’ latest court drama has a novel twist — he’s the plaintiff.

The 49-year-old former “Nightline” anchor filed suit Monday in Manhattan Supreme Court against his Greenwich Village condo board.

He claims board members Ronnie Hirsh and Adam Hemlock have refused to let him combine the two apartments he owns at 148-150 Waverly Place and have fought him over updating an outside gate and garden.

Here is the complaint. Some of you might read it and dismiss it as #richpeopleproblems, but remember: rich people are people too. If you unreasonably reject their renovation requests, do they not bleed?

Reading over the complaint, I felt quite sympathetic toward Abrams, who alleges that he is not being allowed to do with his own property things that neighbors, including board members, were able to do with theirs. It does seem quite unfair.

Defendant Adam Hemlock is an antitrust partner at Weil Gotshal, where he serves on the firm’s executive committee. And, according to Abrams, Hemlock tried to poison their communications by invoking his Biglaw background for intimidation purposes:

That this tactic didn’t work against Dan Abrams shouldn’t surprise. He’s a leading legal journalist, a graduate of Columbia Law School, and a member of legal-world aristocracy: his father is Floyd Abrams, a preeminent constitutional and First Amendment lawyer (and longtime Cahill Gordon partner), and his sister is Judge Ronnie Abrams, of the super-prestigious Southern District of New York.

We reached out to Weil Gotshal and Adam Hemlock for comment but haven’t heard back. If and when we do, we will update this story.

Sponsored

Who will prevail in this battle between two prominent lawyers? If Dan Abrams ends up selling his units — which struck me as one logical solution, given all the acrimony here — rest assured that the apartments, for which he paid a total of $3.8 million (Units A and C) several years ago, will be the subject of a lavish Lawyerly Lairs spread.

ABC’s legal analyst files a suit of his own — against his neighbors [New York Post via Morning Docket]
Daniel Abrams v. Waverly Mews Condominium – Summons and Complaint [New York Supreme Court]

Sponsored