Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Commercial Leasing Law & StrategyLJN NewslettersNewsSections

Ethics of Settlement: Restricting Plaintiff's Counsel from Representing Future Claimants

By Jennifer Smith Finnegan

Your client, Mega Landlord, Inc., has reached an agreement to settle Plaintiffs' claims of alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and the parallel state statute relating to accessibility issues at Landlord's hotel in downtown Megatropolis. Both sides have devoted significant time and resources to the lawsuit: Thousands of pages of proprietary information has been produced by Landlord to Plaintiff's counsel under the terms of a protective order; witnesses have been deposed, and extensive briefing on the legal and factual issues has been submitted.

Landlord's CEO is happy with the decision to settle, but is worried that this costly litigation arises from nothing more than a personal vendetta by Plaintiff's lawyer, Sue Orbesood. He believes Ms. Orbesood intends to make a career out of suing Landlord for alleged ADA-related violations at all of its many properties ' as well as for violations of any other laws or regulations she can come up with now that she has extensive records relating to Landlord and the Megatropolis property. Because the desire to get Ms. Orbesood out of its hair was central to Landlord's decision to settle, Landlord's CEO instructs you to include in the settlement agreement the following provisions:

  • Ms. Orbesood will not represent future claimants in ADA claims against Landlord;
  • She will keep the fact, terms and amount of the settlement confidential;
  • She will neither advertise the fact that she prosecuted an ADA suit against Landlord, nor use Landlord's name in any advertising or promotional materials;
  • She will not solicit individuals with potential ADA accessibility or accommodation claims against Landlord, refer them to other counsel or share a fee with other counsel in connection with such claims; and
  • She will return not only all confidential documents produced during the litigation pursuant to the terms of the existing protective order, but also all of her work product, which she will not use to aid any future claimants.
  • In return, Landlord will pay Ms. Orbesood a premium above and beyond her legal fees, in addition to the settlement amount already agreed upon between the parties.

If Ms. Orbesood will not agree to these terms, Landlord's CEO suggests, as an alternative, that Landlord offer to retain Ms. Orbesood as a legal consultant. Landlord would pay her a monthly fee to be “on call” to advise it in connection with ADA-related compliance issues. The agreement would be memorialized in a separate retainer agreement entered after the settlement with her client is consummated. Ms. Orbesood would provide valuable insight to help Landlord minimize its exposure to future ADA lawsuits, and the arrangement would have the intended result of conflicting her out of taking any cases against Landlord in the future.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers Image

There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases Image

The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.