Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW
Beginning in June, Thomson Reuters News & Insight content will be available exclusively on WestlawNext®, as part of its Practitioner Insights offering. On June 21, the Thomson Reuters News & Insight website, iPhone® app and newsletters will be discontinued. See Frequently Asked Questions to learn more.

Legal

  •  
  •  

Businessmen with briefcases climbing office building steps, file photo. REUTERS Benoit Tessier

Ropes & Gray sued for professional negligence

9/7/2012 COMMENTS (0)

By Casey Sullivan

Sept 7 (Reuters) - The Boston law firm Ropes & Gray has been sued in San Francisco Superior Court for its alleged role in the unraveling of marketing services company EMAK Worldwide Inc.

EMAK Holdings Inc, the successor of EMAK Worldwide, said in court papers that legal advice provided by Ropes & Gray in a 2009 proxy contest contributed to EMAK Worldwide's financial woes and helped push the company into bankruptcy. The company is the parent of several advertising agencies and emerged from Chapter 11 in June 2011. It is asking for unspecified damages.

In an 18-page lawsuit filed on Aug. 30, EMAK said Ropes & Gray "breached its duty to exercise reasonable care, skill, and diligence and to act competently" when it advised the company in 2009 on a stock transaction that granted preferred shareholders a new right to vote in a proxy contest.

EMAK at the time was engaged in a battle with its former CEO, Donald Kurz, and was seeking to prevent him from regaining control of the company's board of directors. By granting preferred stockholders roughly 28 percent of the voting power in electing directors, EMAK hoped to prevent Kurz from wresting control of the board.

Once EMAK granted the new voting rights, Kurz and a group of supportive shareholders filed a motion in Delaware Chancery Court challenging the move. Kurz and his shareholder supporters argued that under Delaware law, a company's board of directors can't make a decision for "the sole or primary purpose of thwarting a shareholder vote" without compelling justification, according to court papers.

Before the Delaware court issued a ruling in the case, EMAK agreed to rescind the transaction. Vice Chancellor Travis Laster ordered EMAK to pay a $2.5 million fee to cover the legal costs of the opposing shareholders, a financial burden that forced the firm to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, according to EMAK's lawsuit against Ropes & Gray.

A Ropes & Gray spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

EMAK also said the court battle over the stock transaction cost it more than $5 million in legal fees, according to court documents. It did not specify what percentage of those fees were collected by Ropes & Gray, its lead counsel.

Kurz temporarily won, then lost control of the board after EMAK rescinded the transaction, according to EMAK lawyer Ray Gallo. Kurz subsequently took a position at Omelet, a branding company, according to Omelet's website.

In its lawsuit against 1,000-lawyer Ropes & Gray, EMAK claims former Ropes & Gray attorney Christopher Austin, who worked as EMAK's lead lawyer during the proxy battle, breached a duty to EMAK by not fully vetting the legality of the stock transaction before it was signed.

Austin was the co-head of Ropes & Gray's technology company and venture capital practice group. He left the firm in February 2010 and is now with Goodwin Procter. Austin did not return requests for comment.

In its lawsuit, EMAK said Kurz corresponded with Austin via email the day the transaction was signed by EMAK's board of directors. Citing Delaware law, Kurz warned Austin that the transaction was illegal. But Austin, whose client EMAK blamed Kurz for the company's poor performance, ignored Kurz's warning, EMAK's lawsuit said.

Gallo said in a statement, "EMAK regrets that the parties have been unable to resolve this matter informally." A Goodwin Procter spokesman referred comments to Ropes & Gray.

The case is: EMAK Holdings, Inc, as successor to EMAK v. Ropes & Gray, No. CGC-12-523843.

For the plaintiff: Ray Gallo, Dominic Valerian and Patrick Chesney of Gallo.

For the defendant: Not immediately available.

Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook 


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters