After a Dispute Among Counsel for a Putative Class Regarding the Sharing of Attorneys Fees, the Northern District Denied a Motion to Terminate Counsel of Record
- Image by Getty Images via @daylife
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied plaintiffs’ motion to terminate its counsel of record and appointed a special master in Red v. Unilever PLC, No. C 10-00387 JW, 2010 WL 3629689 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2010). Certain plaintiffs in a class action filed a notice of termination of Beck & Lee and Reese Richman LLP as counsel. Id. *1.
Background
Plaintiffs allege in the class action that Defendants engaged in false advertising for the product “I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter!” Id. Three law firms undertook representation of the named Plaintiffs and the putative class, pursuant to a Joint Prosecution Agreement. Id. *2. On August 16, 2010, Mr. Weston, one of Plaintiffs’ attorneys of record, filed a Notice of Termination, effectively moving to terminate the Reese Richman and Beck & Lee firms as co-counsel for Plaintiffs. Id. *1. Two days later, Beck & Lee filed an Opposition to the Notice, charging the Weston Firm with engaging in “a shocking course of unethical and bad faith conduct.” Id. Beck & Lee’s Opposition contended, inter alia, that: Read the rest of this entry »
CALIFORNIA CLASS ACTION LAW 