Global legal giant Dentons is defiant in the face of a $32 million jury verdict rendered by an Ohio jury and defends its Swiss verein structure that has helped the firm to achieve its enormous growth.
The size of the firm and the structure lead to the issue which involved an administrative judge at the US International Trade Commission making a disqualification order against Dentons in 2015 in relation to its client RevoLaze. At issue was the firm’s argument that the US branch of the firm was separate from its Canadian branch, which had represented Gap, a RevoLaze retailer who were sued for alleged patent infringement.
The disqualification resulted in litigation against the firm by RevoLaze in a case resulting in the Ohio judgment against the firm.
However, Dentons say the verdict was wrong and in a statement issued to LawFuel say they will appeal.
Dentons Statement
“We will appeal. The verdict was simply wrong. Just as our position was vindicated on appeal by the International Trade Commission, we will be vindicated on appeal in this matter. Importantly, the jury was not asked to make any determination regarding our Firm’s structure or conflicts clearance process and its decision in no way undermines the ITC’s reversal of the improper initial disqualification.
The Firm has a robust and sophisticated conflict clearing process that has enabled it to opens tens of thousands of matters every year without incident. With regard to our former client RevoLaze, we assisted it in an enforcement action in the ITC which RevoLaze itself characterized at the time as a “complete success.”
We acted properly, ethically, and consistent with our duties to our clients at all times.”
Recently on LawFuel
- Winston Taylor Launches Another Big Law Brand
- BigLaw’s AI Arms Race Just Escalated As Kirkland & Ellis Puts $500 Million Behind Its Own Generative AI PlatformThe legal tech arms race just moved up a weight class. Kirkland & Ellis, the world’s highest‑grossing law firm, has set aside an eye‑watering $500 million to build its own proprietary generative AI platform, rather than relying on the same off‑the‑shelf tools everyone else can buy. The strategy, revealed by firm chair Jon Ballis and first reported by the Financial Times, marks a deliberate pivot away from simply licensing commercial software. Ballis says the firm expects to spend more than $100 million this year alone on custom AI services, with hundreds of millions more to follow over the next three to four years – roughly 1% of Kirkland’s annual revenue. Log in to read . . .
- Latham Raids MoFo London Boss in Tech-Heavy M&A PlayLatham & Watkins has hired a three-partner M&A and private equity team from Morrison & Foerster in London, led by MoFo’s former City boss Andrew Boyd, in a move that underlines the firm’s appetite for tech-heavy deal work and high-end public company mandates. Boyd, previously managing partner of MoFo’s 60-lawyer London office, is joined by fellow partners Gary Brown and newly-minted partner Luke Rowland, all three decamping to Latham’s corporate bench in the City. Log in to read more . .
- Trainee To Equity Partner: The 12-Year BigLaw Timeline, Mapped HonestlyRoughly one in twenty associates who start at a top US firm will make equity partner there. That is the number nobody puts in the recruiting brochure. The brochure says the partnership track is “approximately eight to ten years.” That is technically true and practically misleading — because it describes the timeline of people who finish, not the probability of finishing. The honest answer is that the BigLaw partnership track is a twelve-year funnel with five stages, four exit ramps, and a survival rate that would not pass muster as a clinical trial outcome. Here is what each stage actually looks like. Log in to read timeline . . .
- Kirkland & Ellis Forms Real Assets Group With 600 Lawyers
