Law Firms
Lawyer’s Affair Leads to Firm Breakup, $2M Verdict
Posted Jul 14, 2008 2:26 PM CST
By Martha Neil
In a civil theft verdict that could hit two attorneys with some $2 million in damages, a Florida jury found late last month that two longtime associates of a well-known Tampa personal injury attorney essentially stripped the owner of their former firm of much of his practice.
The verdict—which was originally higher—was upheld Friday: Richard Mulholland's former associates, William Winters, 48, and Marc Yonker, 41, asked Hillsborough Circuit Judge Richard Nielsen to declare a mistrial or set aside the jury's verdict, recounts the Tampa Tribune. "Nielsen declined to do so but did reduce the jury's verdict from $1 million to about $575,000. Then, per the law, he tripled those damages to $1.7 million."
It took seven years for the case to wend its way through the legal system to trial, starting with the two associates' ambition for a bigger role in the firm and an apparent affair between Winters and a then 29-year-old paralegal, Betsy Chapa, both of whom were married, reports the St. Petersburg Times in a lengthy feature article.
Ordered by Mulholland, who is now 74, to fire her, because it would be harder to replace an associate than a paralegal, Winters did so. But at that point, according to Mulholland's complaint and the jury's verdict, his former paralegal and the two associates began copying his high-dollar case files in preparation to form a new law firm, according to the Times.
Chapa also admittedly hacked into her former law firm's computer after she was fired and changed client information to prevent Mulholland from being able to reach his clients once the two associates left. In their testimony, they denied that she did so at their request.
Winters and Yonker, who had been with Mulholland since 1985 and 1995, respectively, according to his complaint, didn't grant interviews to the Times. But their sworn statements "suggest they may well have felt exploited during their time in the older attorney's firm," the newspaper recounts. "Mulholland personally handled perhaps half a dozen cases at a time; Yonker alone was assigned to as many as 350. By most accounts, Mulholland rarely appeared in court, conducted a deposition, or fielded clients' calls. But when the fees rolled in, roughly two-thirds of that revenue went to him and the firm."
Says Mulholland, who insists the case was never merely about the money, "They basically took 40 years of my work"—snapping his fingers—"just like that."
- How B of A’s GC Got Fired: Leave Now, and Leave Your BlackBerry Behind
- Schools Ranked by 'Super Lawyers' Produced
- Law Firm Price Wars Break Out as Some Try ‘Loss Leader’ Bids for Work
- Five Questions for Law Firms Abandoning Lockstep Compensation
- Judge Jails 2 Attorneys for Contempt in 4 Days
- Reed Smith Will Ask Nonequity Partners to Pony Up Possibly 15% of Pay
- Court Deputy Ordered to Apologize or Face Jail After Taking Lawyer's Paperwork
- Skadden Jumps on the Bonus Bandwagon
- ABA Executive Director Resigns
- Nasty Attitude to Co-Worker, Naughty Word in E-Mail Cost 2 Their Jobs
Should Supreme Court Justices Be Able to Review News Accounts Before Publication?
Comments
bob
Jul 18, 2008 5:43 AM CST
Blah, these guys got screwed harder then that intern on a Friday night when madam Winters was out of town for the weekend. Mulholland, should have been involved in his own law practice, maybe then he would know the phone number of his own clients!! 40 years of his work? Iol I call bullshit!
Flag this comment
Allen J Genaldi
Jul 18, 2008 5:47 AM CST
Another Tampa landmark dismantled.
Flag this comment
Chris
Jul 18, 2008 5:55 AM CST
I tend to agree with Bob. Yonker had 350 cases at a time and Mulholland had 6??? Mulholland is upset not because he lost 40 years of “his” work, but because his absence was exploited against him.
Flag this comment
Tampa Ex
Jul 18, 2008 6:05 AM CST
Don’t like working conditions? Move. But don’t steal your employer’s stuff. Period. Jury in Tampa made a good decision.
Flag this comment
Barry
Jul 18, 2008 6:07 AM CST
So even though these guys were"exploited”, it was OK for them to steal the bosses client files?
Being the owner means you get to do what you want. Being the employee means you get to do what the boss tells you and if you don’t like it, you leave.
Flag this comment
A Stetson Law Alum
Jul 18, 2008 6:10 AM CST
Well, at least that’s one less horrible P.I. law firm commercial that we’ll have to endure on TV down here in Tampa…
Flag this comment
Charlote
Jul 18, 2008 6:15 AM CST
If you will steal from a boss you will steal from a client. We have had them leave here both ways. We send work to the good-guys and are abruptly silent about the others.
Flag this comment
HVB
Jul 18, 2008 6:16 AM CST
Winters and Chapa showed their true colors by having an affair while married (I guess that’s redundant). If they cheat that way, what’s to be trusted? There are right and wrong ways to deal with employment and compensation issues.
Flag this comment
Al Veoli
Jul 18, 2008 6:19 AM CST
Do we really care about humpin’ trashy lawyers in Florida? Do lawyers need to hear about this? We want substance, not sleaze from the home of the TV show cops. If there were good-lookin’ lawyers, this wouldn’t happen.
Flag this comment
Older and Wiser Guy
Jul 18, 2008 6:28 AM CST
Boy, there are no good guys in this story. We have three thieves, two adulterers, and one laz, greedy slavedriver.
But, the verdict is obviously correct. The associates should have just said take this job and shove it, old man, not steal his files.
Flag this comment
bobie ray
Jul 18, 2008 6:45 AM CST
disbar them from ever practicing again….we don’t need these kind of lawyers
Flag this comment
Igor
Jul 18, 2008 6:55 AM CST
This story raises multiple questions. How do you steal business from a personal injury attorney? It’s not like these are return clients. Did the jury just guesstimate the value of the open files? Why didn’t these guys just go get their own 1-800 number and promise money for misery? How did these guys think they would get away with this? The old man would just go-Wow all the information in my active files is missing I wonder what happened- maybe it was those two guys that worked here forever and recently quit? Wouldn’t the old man have a lien on all the files anyway?
Flag this comment
SoonToBe
Jul 18, 2008 7:08 AM CST
Wow. And this is what leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the public that views our profession with such disdain…
Flag this comment
Jade
Jul 18, 2008 9:17 AM CST
I agree with Tampa X and others. If you don’t like the job, go elsewhere. Don’t steal clients. Mullholland can run HIS PRACTICE as HE CHOOSES. IF you’re dumb enough to do all the work for not enough money that’s your own fault.
Flag this comment
Brad
Jul 18, 2008 10:13 AM CST
I dont know how these guys still have their law license
Flag this comment
Marissa
Jul 18, 2008 2:34 PM CST
Mullholland should have been more involved in his own practice? Please!!! His name is on the door and it’s his practice. You don’t like the fact that you have 350 cases and he has 6 go work somewhere else. Clearly, Mullholland was not getting all of the money or else these jokers would not have stuck around for 16 and 6 years respectively. You don’t like how someone is operating their law firm…you LEAVE!!!
Flag this comment
Wynstone
Jul 18, 2008 6:04 PM CST
Igor, personal injury lawyers do have return clients. They’re called insurance companies.
Flag this comment
kay sieverding
Jul 20, 2008 9:08 AM CST
Did the associates have a non-compete agreement? What they took were “leads”, the names of potential customers, right? What happens when a stockbroker or a real estate agent takes leads to a new position? I thought it was standard practice for a stockbroker to take customer names when switching firms.
Flag this comment
Charles
Jul 20, 2008 1:53 PM CST
Lots of people can work up cases. Few can bring them in. If the cases were coming in because of Mulholland, then the fee allocation was fair.
Flag this comment
associate
Jul 21, 2008 10:24 AM CST
Kay, you’re a danger to yourself and others. Get out of law, or get a degree.
Theft of trade secrets has never been ok. There is a whole stream of cases routinely finding against people for stealing trade secrets, even if they just memorize client lists. These people are typically professional trustees and other investment types, or salesmen.
Further, there is no such thing as non-compete agreements for attorneys. Any restriction on practice is unenforceable. This is to allow free access to the attorney of a client’s choice.
Flag this comment
Alcindoro
Jul 21, 2008 4:02 PM CST
“Older and Wiser” (#10) got it right.
ABA scoops the Inquirer once more.
Flag this comment
Kay Sieverding
Jul 22, 2008 11:01 AM CST
To # 20
Why would it matter whether a noncompete agreement involved a lawyer, a stock broker, a physicians., a landscaper, or a hair cutter? You could argue from the customer’s viewpoint that all involve unique services and that they should be able to hire whomever they want, someone who is familiar with them and their special needs. How do stock brokers get away with taking “their” customer lists to a new position?
Flag this comment
FL Law
Jul 23, 2008 1:33 PM CST
Kay, #20 has it right. The difference is the fact that lawyers are governed by Rules of Professional Conduct which forbid a noncompete agreement. Try law school, or perhaps just not posting on topics on which you are uninformed. I defer to the old adage: “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”
Flag this comment
Add a Comment
We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.
Commenting has expired on this post.