Differing Versions of Postnup in McCourt Divorce Put Focus on Bingham Lawyer
Frank and Jamie McCourt signed six copies of a postnup agreement before taking over the Dodgers, and three of them apparently give Frank control of the team.
One word was changed in those three copies: “inclusive” became “exclusive,” according to the Los Angeles Times.
Frank McCourt’s divorce lawyers contend that the word choice was just a drafting error that was later corrected in three versions of the agreement, albeit without their client’s knowledge, the story says. Jamie McCourt’s lawyers, on the other hand, say the conflicting versions of the agreement are reason enough to throw it out, and in any event, she would never have given up her rights to the team. She has testified she thought the agreement simply put family homes in her name to shield them from creditors, ESPN explains.
The first phase of the trial focuses on the validity of the agreement, putting the focus on the Bingham McCutchen partner who drafted it, Larry Silverstein, the Times says. The story identifies two legal ethics questions for Silverstein: “How does he explain the conflicting language in the various copies of the agreement, and why did he apparently substitute one version for another without notifying his clients of the discrepancy?”
Michael Dempsey, a lawyer whose firm represents plaintiffs in legal malpractice cases, told the Times that if the agreement is invalidated, Frank McCourt could have a “stupendous” claim against Silverstein and his firm—one for half the value of the team, amounting to perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars.
The blog Dodger Divorce, written by a University of Minnesota law student, says the court doesn’t have subpoena power over Silverstein “and, for obvious reasons, he’s not eager to testify voluntarily.”
