Judge Delivers Stinging Rebuke To Partners For Freezing Out Associates
This may come as a shock, but he wasn't pleased.
But I would be remiss if I did not observe the irony of another missed opportunity to invest in our profession’s future when two of the motions originally noticed for hearing seek massive fees and costs. To be clear, GSI asks for $6,810,686.69 in attorney’s fees, $1,828,553.07 in non-taxable costs and $337,300.86 in taxable costs, while UMI asks for $6,694,562 in attorney’s fees, $648,166 in expenses and $302,579.70 in taxable costs. That a few more dollars could not be spent is disappointing to me. My disappointment, however, is unlikely to compare to the disappointment of the associates, who were deprived yet again of an opportunity to argue in court.
— Magistrate Judge Paul Grewal, responding to the decision of DLA Piper and Ruyak Cherian to waive oral argument rather than allow associates to argue a handful of post-trial motions. Nothing stings like, “I’m not mad, I’m just disappointed.”
New Report - Are Small Firms Achieving Their Legal Tech Goals?
(Check out the whole order on the next page.)
Sponsored
The Ethical use of Generative AI
Mitigating M&A Cyber Risk: Pre- & Post-Acquisition Due Diligence
How To Maximize Productivity With Westlaw Precision With CoCounsel
Attention Buyer: Not All Legal AI Models Are Created Equal
New Report - Are Small Firms Achieving Their Legal Tech Goals?
