Law Practice,
Law Office Management,
Bankruptcy
Aug. 11, 2016
Run the Jewel to the high court
We'll have to wait for the California Supreme Court to settle the debate over whether a bankrupt California law firm's estate may demand profits that its former partners generate from hourly fee matters at their new firms.
Suzzanne Uhland
Partner
O'Melveny & Myers LLP
Email: suhland@omm.com
Suzzanne is chair of O'Melveny's US Restructuring Practice. She represents parties in Chapter 11 reorganizations and out of court restructurings and buyers and sellers in Bankruptcy Code Section 363(b) sales and other distress transactions. She also practices with the Firm's Transactions attorneys, both in bankruptcy cases and in structuring transactions to avoid bankruptcy-related risks.
Jennifer M. Taylor
Partner
O'Melveny & Myers LLP
Email: jtaylor@omm.com
Jennifer represents clients in connection with the financing for leveraged buyouts, secured and unsecured working capital facilities, and other structured financings, including mezzanine loans, high yield, and the financing of debtors in bankruptcy.
Until recently, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals seemed poised to finally settle the debate over whether the estate of a bankrupt California law firm has the right to demand profits that its former partners generate from hourly fee matters at their new firms. For a definitive answer, however, it appears we will now have to wait for the California Supreme Court to weigh in.
Under the so-called "unfinished business" rule, client cases and the future profits from such cases are the...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In