Conflicts — Swimming League Sues Form Firm Over Conflict and More, Hurricane DQ Bid Denied, Regulator’s Pipeline Conflict Considered
Posted on
“International Swimming League Sues Its Former Law Firm Over Negligence, Unfair Practices” —
- “The International Swimming League, which at this point has spent as much time in the courtroom as it ever did in a natatorium, is suing its former law firm for more than $7 million.”
- “The Zurch-based ISL and founder Konstantin Grigorishin sued the law firm Farella Braun + Martel in San Francisco Superior Court on December 30. The suit accuses the firm of professional negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of implied contract, and unfair business practices in its anti-trust case against FINA (now World Aquatics)”
- Full complaint here.
- “The suit alleges that co-defendant Neil A. Goteiner, a partner in the firm, ‘persuaded ISL to hire Defendants…despite having little experience prosecuting antitrust actions.'”
- “That representing the three named athletes (Katinka Hosszu, Tom Shields, and Michael Andrew) in the anti-trust suit and the ISL in their suit represented a conflict of interest and they did not obtain ISL’s informed written consent to the joint representation.”
“The matter of conflict of interest will prove peculiar to the general public, because ISL recruited the athletes to participate in their suit and instigated the legal proceedings against FINA.” - “‘The potential conflicts between ISL and Grigorishin, ISL’s president and founder, included the fact that Defendants’ prior representation of Grigorishin provided Defendants with confidential information about Grigorishin and his finances that Defendants could leverage against Plaintiffs when ISL had liquidity issues impacting its ability to pay Defendants’ invoices.'”
“‘The potential conflicts between ISL and the Swimmer Class Plaintiffs included the fact that both ISL and the Swimmer Class Plaintiffs were seeking economic damages from FINA (when FINA’s finances may have been insufficient to satisfy all clients’ claims) and likely would have to agree to any settlement and execution upon any judgment. Also, Defendants’ joint representation presented an obstacle to class certification (a fact that FINA raised in its opposition to the class certification in the Underlying Matter).'” - “The suit is requesting that ISL and Grigorishin receive damages of $7.2 million, what they call the ‘full disgorgement of legal fees and costs…paid to defendants.'”
“Texas Firm Beats Arnold & Itkin DQ Bid In Hurricane Zeta MDL” —
- “A Texas state judge Thursday denied Arnold & Itkin LLP’s bid to disqualify the law firm defending a drilling rig owner in litigation stemming from Hurricane Zeta, finding that Arnold & Itkin hasn’t established that a defense lawyer who had worked for the firm was involved in anything substantially related to the current litigation.”
- “Harris County District Judge Rabeea Collier, in a brief order, denied Arnold & Itkin’s disqualification bid, which claimed that Karina Sanchez-Peralta of Ahmad Zavitsanos & Mensing, who represents Transocean Ltd., worked as a law clerk at Arnold & Itkin in 2022 and improperly sent herself confidential information about the Hurricane Zeta litigation before leaving the firm.”
- “The judge found that, while Sanchez-Peralta performed work for an Arnold & Itkin client who is now a medical expert for the hurricane litigation plaintiffs, Arnold & Itkin hasn’t established that the work Sanchez-Peralta was involved in is ‘substantially related to this litigation.'”
- “‘Additionally, plaintiffs have not demonstrated that they would suffer prejudice if disqualification were not granted,’ the judge said.”
- “The disqualification motion said that while Sanchez-Peralta was a clerk at Arnold & Itkin in 2022, the firm had for two years been representing plaintiffs in the multidistrict litigation created to handle seamen’s claims related to the hurricane. The crew members claim they were injured after Transocean forced their ship to remain in the path of the hurricane when it hit the Gulf of Mexico in October 2020.”
- “Ahmad Zavitsanos then ‘recruited’ Sanchez-Peralta before the end of her employment with Arnold & Itkin, the firm said, adding that she started there in September 2023 and became attorney of record for Transocean in the Hurricane Zeta MDL in March 2024.”
- “Sanchez-Peralta, who was chosen by her employer to serve as ‘lead attorney on all issues related to medical damages, witnesses and records,’ took work product from Arnold & Itkin related to the Hurricane Zeta MDL ‘in the final minutes’ of her employment, Arnold & Itkin argued.”
- “‘Then, according to her own LinkedIn profile, she took a job at AZA,’ the motion said. ‘Plaintiffs just discovered these violations and the conflict of interest after feeling compelled to investigate other potential ethical and professional violations based on Transocean and its counsel’s recent conduct in the media.'”
- “Arnold & Itkin was referring to news articles written by Texas Lawbook and Law360 that detail allegations Ahmad Zavitsanos has raised against Arnold & Itkin related to medical costs for Hurricane Zeta plaintiffs.”
“Summit: South Dakota regulator has conflict” —
- “The Iowa company proposing a carbon dioxide pipeline has formally requested that a South Dakota regulator recuse herself from the project’s permit application in that state because of an alleged conflict of interest — but the regulator said she does not have ‘a legal conflict.'”
- “In a letter sent last week, Summit Carbon Solutions asked South Dakota Public Utilities Commissioner Kristie Fiegen to disqualify herself. That would allow the governor to appoint another state official to fill in for Fiegen during the three-member commission’s consideration of Summit’s application.”
- “Summit wants to construct a $9 billion, five-state pipeline to capture and transport some of the carbon dioxide emitted by 57 ethanol plants to an underground storage area in North Dakota. The project would capitalize on federal tax credits incentivizing the prevention of heat-trapping carbon emissions into the atmosphere.”
- “The project has a storage permit in North Dakota and route permits in North Dakota, Iowa and Minnesota, while Nebraska has no state permitting process for CO2 pipelines. The project also faces litigation from opponents in multiple states.”
- “This is Summit’s second application in South Dakota, after the state’s Public Utilities Commission rejected the first application in 2023. Fiegen recused herself from those proceedings and was replaced then by State Treasurer Josh Haeder.”
- “At the time, Fiegen wrote a recusal letter saying she had a conflict because the pipeline ‘would cross land owned by my sister-in-law (my husband’s sister) and her husband.’ Fiegen also recused herself from an earlier, separate crude oil pipeline permit application for a similar reason.”
- “Fiegen has not recused herself from the new application, but Summit said the same conflict exists.”
- “‘As with your previous decisions,’ said the company’s new letter to Fiegen, ‘the facts and established South Dakota law support a decision that you should step aside.'”
- “Fiegen responded with a letter to Summit. In its entirety, Fiegen’s letter said, ‘I am an elected Public Utilities Commissioner and will carry out my duties as such. I do not have a legal conflict. I am sitting on the docket.'”
- “The Summit letter drew criticism from an attorney representing landowners opposed to the pipeline, Brian Jorde, of Domina Law Group in Omaha, who disputed the allegation that Fiegen has a conflict of interest.”
- “‘From my viewpoint she never had a conflict that rises to the level of recusal and certainly doesn’t now,’ Jorde wrote. ‘The isolated fact that she is related by marriage to a trustee of a trust that owns land that signed an easement with Summit is not a direct conflict.'”
- “Summit’s new letter said the logic that motivated Fiegen’s prior recusal remains unchanged. The company said her involvement risks violating South Dakota law, which the company said bars officials from participating in matters where conflicts exist.”
- “The letter said Fiegen’s failure to recuse herself could lead to litigation, an appeal of the commission’s eventual permit decision and delays in the permitting process.”
- “‘Because your family has a direct interest in the approval or denial of the permit, and because you previously recused yourself in two dockets based on the same facts, a court almost certainly would find it inappropriate for you to participate in this docket,’ the letter states.”
