Legal Malpractice Verdict Against Largest Law Firm on Planet

Hattiesburg, MSWhile one would assume lawyers should know better, the esteemed practice of law is not above wrongdoing—as any Legal Malpractice case will attest. A recent legal malpractice lawsuit resulted in a Mississippi jury awarding a $103 million legal malpractice settlement in favor of the plaintiffs against the largest law firm in the world.

That law firm is Baker & McKenzie, which strongly disagrees with the verdict. The lawsuit was filed by a Texas businessman who alleged that while representing him in several oil-drilling deals from 2000 to 2006, Baker & McKenzie actually worked with his business partner behind his back, treating his company like a personal "piggy bank," forcing litigation aimed at "bringing him to his knees," and ultimately driving his business into the ground. The proceedings were summarized in the November 3rd issue of Lawyers Weekly USA.

According to documents introduced at trial in the Legal Malpractice Law case, plaintiff S. Lavon Evans was approached by businessman Reed Cagle to create an enterprise to operate an oil rig, known as Rig 12. According to legal counsel for a cross-plaintiff in the matter, the intent was for Cagle to contribute $5.6 million in cash, with Evans contributing Rig 12 to the formation of Laredo Energy Holdings. Evans was to have a 51 percent ownership, with Cagle claiming the remaining 49 percent.

However, it was alleged that Cagle, rather than making the cash contribution, mortgaged Rig 12 allegedly without the knowledge or consent of Evans.

It was further alleged that the law firm worked with Cagle to put $7 million in debt against Rig 12 and another rig owned by Evans, Rig 11. Subsidiary companies spun off of Laredo allegedly without the knowledge or consent of Evans favored Cagle with a reported $8 million in value.

Rigs 11 and 12 were subsequently seized by the sheriff and sold at auction to satisfy debts.

The legal malpractice trial attempted to determine if Baker & McKenzie indeed represented Evans and/or cross-plaintiff Laredo Holdings. The law firm denied such representation.

However, evidence produced at trial appeared to conclude that there was representation. Legal counsel for Laredo, Laurence E. Best, stated that evidence of a long-term relationship between Evans, Laredo and Baker & McKenzie was "overwhelming."

"There was correspondence, documents, e-mails and even a few telephone messages from 2000 up until 2006... The cumulative effect of the years and the documents was very strong evidence," said Best, a partner at Best Koeppel in New Orleans.

Among the evidence cited at trial was a check payable to Baker & McKenzie from Evans and his companies for legal services in excess of $7,000.

The jury found in favor of the plaintiffs. Of the total award, cross-plaintiff Laredo will be entitled to $22.4 million.

Legal malpractices cases are often complicated, requiring the services of legal malpractice experts to successfully wade through the complexities in order to arrive at a just conclusion. Baker & McKenzie was reported to have billed $2.1 billion in gross revenues worldwide in 2009.