M. Davis

A law firm sued a former associate lawyer for $3 million, alleging breach of fiduciary duty and contract after he left to join a competing firm.

The firm sought a declaration that the departing lawyer was not entitled to compensation for unbilled work in progress (WIP) existing at the time of his departure.

The departing lawyer counterclaimed for his share of fees billed and collected post-departure.

On cross-motions for summary judgment, the court dismissed the law firm's damages claim, finding the lawyer's actions constituted permissible planning and compliance with professional obligations, not competition.

The court also held that the oral compensation agreement entitled the departing lawyer to his share of fees on files he had carriage of, once those files were billed and collected, regardless of his departure.

A case conference was held to address trial management issues for an upcoming virtual trial concerning a development project and a claim of misfeasance of public office.

The court issued directions regarding the narrowing of issues, the exchange of witness lists and will-say statements, the filing of a joint document brief, and the scheduling of witnesses.

A dispute among siblings arose regarding ownership and disposition of a Florida condominium held in joint tenancy between an elderly incapable mother and one daughter.

The court considered whether a 2004 transfer creating the joint tenancy conveyed a beneficial interest or was subject to a resulting trust, applying the principles in Pecore v. Pecore.

The court held that the gratuitous transfer raised a presumption of resulting trust that the daughter failed to rebut, leaving the beneficial ownership with the mother.

The court ordered that the property be sold to fund the incapable person’s care, subject to the daughter’s right to purchase it at a price reflecting reimbursement for certain renovation expenses.

Costs were awarded to the opposing siblings who were substantially successful.

The trustee in bankruptcy for several related real estate development companies brought applications to determine the priority of claims against the proceeds of a sold property and to set aside various payments and security granted to an investor, Dr. Goldfinger, as transfers at undervalue, fraudulent conveyances, or unjust preferences.

The court allowed some of the proofs of claim while disallowing others or requiring further evidence.

The court dismissed the trustee's claim to set aside a $2.5 million settlement payment to Goldfinger, finding it was made at arm's length and without intent to defraud creditors.

However, the court set aside a $471,000 payment to Goldfinger as a fraudulent conveyance, finding it was made with the intent to defeat another secured creditor, and ordered Goldfinger to repay the amount to the bankrupt estate.

In a bankruptcy proceeding involving the estate of a bankrupt developer, the moving parties sought determination of priorities among claims.

During the hearing, counsel requested that transcripts of viva voce evidence be provided in a fully searchable electronic format for use in the continuation of the hearing.

The court found the request reasonable in modern litigation practice, noting the increasing reliance on electronic transcripts by both counsel and judges.

Given the lack of standardized electronic transcript formats prescribed by the Ministry of the Attorney General, the court ordered that the transcripts be produced in a fully word-searchable electronic format.