Risk Update

Firm Faces DQ Motion in AI Training Fight, Client Can’t Pause Conflicts-related Malpractice Suit, No Memory, No Conflict?

Posted Dan Bressler

“Law firm Crowell faces disqualification bid in AI lawsuit” —

  • “A fight over attorney loyalties has erupted in a lawsuit over the use of photographs to train AI technology, threatening law firm Crowell & Moring’s continued role in the case.”
  • “Online art gallery DeviantArt asked a federal judge in Los Angeles on Wednesday to disqualify Crowell & Moring from representing automotive photography company Evox in the lawsuit, saying the firm previously advised defendant DeviantArt and its parent company on AI and other matters.”
  • “DeviantArt said in a court filing, that Crowell advised its parent company Wix.com and its subsidiaries from 2022 through 2026 on AI litigation, AI regulation and copyright issues. The company said the firm also advised DeviantArt on its DreamUp AI image-generation service.”
  • “‘Crowell’s conflict  is substantive, not merely technical,’ DeviantArt told the court. It said the firm’s prior work allowed it to acquire ‘material confidential information’ about the company.”
  • Filing: here.

“Ex-Paul Weiss Client Can’t Pause Malpractice Suit Against Firm” —

  • “Fairstead Capital Management’s malpractice suit against Paul Weiss for allegedly failing to disclose a conflict will continue rather than holding for an underlying appeal. Fairstead is represented simultaneously by Kasowitz and Skadden in different layers of the dispute.”
  • “A former Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison client who accused the law firm of failing to disclose a conflict in its representation cannot pause its malpractice lawsuit against its ex-counsel, a New York judge has ruled.”
  • “Fairstead Capital Management’s motion to pause its case against Paul Weiss was denied by the Manhattan Supreme Court this month, despite its argument that a pending Delaware appeal for an underlying dispute could determine the scope of its New York legal malpractice case.”
  • “The dispute between real estate investment firm Fairstead and Paul Weiss spans several court dockets in the two states. So far, more than half a dozen firms have entered the litigation across New York and Delaware, including Kasowitz LLP; Paul Weiss; Simpson Thacher & Bartlett; Skadden, Arps, Meagher, Slate & Flom; Quinn, Emanuel, Urquhart & Sullivan; Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnel; and Ross Aronstam & Moritz.”
  • “Fairstead originally retained Paul Weiss to advise it on removing two executives, William Blodgett and John Tatum, who allegedly sought to either take over Fairstead or alternatively create a new competitor.”
  • “According to Fairstead’s legal malpractice complaint, Paul Weiss allegedly failed to disclose its ties to the influential Tisch/Sussman family, which both Blodgett and Tatum are linked to, and also allegedly gave the company poor advice, which led to a ruling against Fairstead in a Delaware suit over Tatum’s removal.”
  • “That Delaware ruling is the one currently on appeal. As a result of the pending appeal, Fairstead sought to delay its New York case against Paul Weiss. Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Joel M. Cohen denied that stay on Friday and kept the parties to their already-agreed-upon briefing schedule for Paul Weiss’ pending motion to dismiss.”
  • “Under that schedule, Fairstead must file any opposition to Paul Weiss’ dismissal motion by Friday, October 23. Paul Weiss then has until November 13 to reply.”

“Judge Finds No Conflict of Interest for Defense Attorney in 2016 Homicide Case” —

  • “DC Superior Court Judge Todd Edelman allowed a defense attorney to remain on a murder case ahead of trial on Oct. 20.”
  • “Wilbert Whitaker, 77, is charged with first-degree murder while armed and possession of a firearm during a crime of violence for his alleged involvement in the fatal shooting of Leo Hackett, 30, on April 30, 2016 at the 800 block of 21st Street, NE. Hackett died from a gunshot wound to his chest.”
  • “Whitaker’s attorney, Nathaniel Mensah, began the hearing by explaining a potential conflict of interest that would necessitate his removal from the case if real. The conflict stemmed from Mensah previously working for a firm that represented the defense’s key witness, Whitaker’s wife. Mensah explained that while he currently does not currently know any information that could bias his relationship to the witness, he could not guarantee he won’t remember this information during the trial.”
  • “After looking at caselaw, in specific Freeman v. United States, Judge Edelman ruled that there was no current conflict of interest, and Mensah should stay on as Whitaker’s lawyer. “
  • “Judge Edelman said that if Mensah in the future did remember some information about the witness that would create a conflict of interest, he can withdraw from the case then.”