Brian D. Chase v. Robert B. Reeves
Published: Jul. 18, 1998 | Result Date: May 11, 1998 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 788455 Arbitration – $31,532
Arbitrator
Court
Orange Superior
Attorneys
Claimant
Respondent
J. Derek Pakiz
(Reeves Law Group)
Experts
Claimant
J. Michael Brown
(technical)
Facts
On Nov. 16, 1996, plaintiff, Brian Chase, was contacted by an individual for representation regarding a personal injury action (hereinafter Client). Plaintiff agreed to represent Client but informed Client that he would be starting new employment in a few weeks at defendant's law firm, the Law Offices of Robert B. Reeves, and that the defendant would sign up the Client rather than have her retain the plaintiff's former employer only to have to execute a substitution of attorney a few weeks later. The defendant then retained Client on Nov. 27, 1996. The plaintiff alleged that defendant Robert Reeves orally agreed that if the plaintiff left his employment, the plaintiff would be entitled to take with him any of the cases that he brought with him to the Reeves Firm or brought into the Reeves Firm at any time after beginning employment, and that the defendant would be entitled to reimbursement on a quantum meruit basis for the work the plaintiff performed on any case while employed at the Reeves Firm. On March 6, 1997, the defendant drafted an agreement which he required the plaintiff to execute. The agreement covered distribution of attorney fees, among other things, on cases that were "defendant's cases", should any of those clients decide to follow the plaintiff if he ever left the defendant's employment. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant again orally agreed that this agreement did not apply to cases the plaintiff brought with him or cases that the plaintiff subsequently retained while employed at defendant's firm. On July 13, 1997, the plaintiff quit his employment with the defendant's firm and began his own practice which ultimately became a partnership, Bisnar & Chase, LLP, with his former employer John Bisnar. When the plaintiff left, the clients the plaintiff referred to the defendant's firm substituted plaintiff in place of the defendant. The plaintiff alleged that at that time, he and the defendant again confirmed orally that the defendant would be entitled to compensation on a quantum meruit basis for work the plaintiff performed on any cases while plaintiff was employed by the defendant. Plaintiff Chase settled the client's case on Dec. 5, 1997, the first day of trial, for the sum of $1,050,000. The defendant was informed on Dec. 22 that the matter had settled. On that same date, defendant Reeves claimed entitlement to 90 percent of the attorney fees, or $378,000, based on the written agreement of March 6. Defendant Reeves denied the existence of any oral agreement. On Dec. 24 the plaintiff filed a complaint against Reeves for breach of contract, fraud, violations of various sections of the Business and Professions Code, and declaratory relief, and initiated discovery shortly thereafter. Before filing an answer, defendant Reeves entered into a stipulation that the subject contract was null, void and unenforceable against any case that the plaintiff referred to defendant's firm. The defendant further stipulated that he would only be entitled to quantum meruit recovery for attorney fees, which was to be decided through binding arbitration.
Settlement Discussions
Per plaintiff, defendant Reeves intially demanded $378,000 but claimed that he would accept $252,000 to resolve the matter without litigation if the plaintiff would accept the offer within 24 hours. In response, plaintiff Chase filed the fraud suit. The defendant then reduced his demand to $84,000 and reduced it again just prior to the arbitration to $42,000, which was rejected.
Other Information
The award was reached approximately six months after the case was filed.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390