Trials & Litigation
Judge accuses high-profile law firms of possible effort to ‘gum up the works’
A federal judge in Boston complained during a status conference Friday that lawyers from three high-profile law firms had filed so many motions and documents that they were failing to keep litigation just, speedy and inexpensive, as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Image from Shutterstock)
A federal judge in Boston complained during a status conference Friday that lawyers from three high-profile law firms had filed so many motions and documents that they were failing to keep litigation just, speedy and inexpensive, as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani of the District of Massachusetts scolded 11 lawyers involved in litigation over the sale of a Mexican funeral company.
Law360 has the story, summarized by Above the Law.
On the one side are lawyers from Boies Schiller Flexner, who represent Servicios Funerarios GG, a Mexican company alleging that it was misled about the financial condition of a funeral business that it bought.
On the other side are lawyers with Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan and with Ropes & Gray. They represent the Advent International Corp., a U.S. private equity investment company with control of the entities that owned the funeral business before its sale.
After Servicios Funerarios filed the fraud lawsuit, the Advent International Corp. filed counterclaims claiming that it was being extorted.
Talwani said the document-heavy litigation appeared to be “an effort to try to gum up the works.” Law360 published her comments.
“I don’t understand how 11 lawyers can jointly make what we are doing here difficult,” Talwani said. “It is not serving you well—your clients paying your bills—and I do want you to pass this message to your client: In order to try to keep your bills down, it would be helpful to try and figure out whether there are some things that don’t have to be fought about.”
“That might serve your clients,” Talwani said. “It might not serve your pocketbooks, and you can tell your clients that was my comment.”
Talwani spoke after the two sides were unable to agree on a litigation timeline. However, the issues extend beyond the Massachusetts case.
“The litigation has proved complicated,” Law360 reports, “as arrest warrants were filed against Advent personnel in the U.S. and Mexico.”
In addition, a related suit in Delaware chancery court sought to enforce terms of the sale agreement.
Carlos Sires of Boies Schiller Flexner told Law360 that its client “shares the court’s frustration and requested the conference because it wanted to address the delays caused by [the Advent International Corp.’s] objections to the depositions of some of its key employees involved in the [funeral home] transaction.”
Lawyers with Quinn Emanuel and Ropes & Gray did not immediately provide a comment to the ABA Journal in response to its emailed request.
