King & Spalding Denies Ethics Warning Led To Atty Firing
By Andrew Strickler
Law360, New York (June 19, 2017, 6:52 PM EDT) -- An ex-King & Spalding associate who has accused the firm of wrongfully firing him for raising ethical concerns about partners representing ZTE Corp. never communicated that he thought anyone had engaged in misconduct, the firm said in a Friday filing in New York federal court.
The firm also said David Joffe, a one-time member of the commercial litigation practice, even helped prepare the response to a 2015 order from a New York federal judge calling on partners Robert Perry and Paul Straus to show why they shouldn’t be sanctioned for allegedly misleading the court.
Joffe “was fully involved in all aspects of preparing for the [temporary restraining order] hearing, participated in fact-gathering communications with the client, and was present in the courtroom for the TRO hearing and did not express any belief that the statement made by Mr. Straus was untrue,” the firm said.
In his May lawsuit, Joffe alleged the firm dropped him from the partnership track, denied him bonuses and ultimately fired him because he raised ethical red flags about alleged false statements by Perry and Straus in federal court.
The telecommunications giant ZTE Corp. hired the firm in 2014 to defend it against allegations brought by Vringo Inc. that ZTE breached a non-disclosure agreement that came out of settlement talks in 2013 over Vringo’s international patent infringement litigation.
Joffe was one of the attorneys assigned to the case, along with Perry and Straus.
During the case, Joffe said Straus made an untrue statement to U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan at a July 2014 hearing regarding Vringo’s request for a temporary restraining order that ZTE had not disclosed confidential information in any context other than in a filing in a Chinese court.
In July 2015, the judge issued an order requesting that Perry and Straus show cause why they shouldn’t be sanctioned, according to the complaint. King & Spalding subsequently withdrew from representing ZTE; the show cause order was still pending when ZTE and Vringo settled the case later that year.
Joffe said he felt that Judge Kaplan’s order “triggered his ethical duty” to report unethical behavior, which prompted him to go to King & Spalding’s general counsel and the outside counsel it had hired to represent the firm in the ZTE case.
Joffe, who joined King & Spalding in January 2012, alleged that led to a string of retaliatory actions, including bonus holdbacks and his eventual termination.
In its response, the firm denied most of the allegations of the suit, including Joffe’s assertion that he’d been on pace to “significantly exceed” the firm’s 2,100-billable hour target for associates as of last fall, or that he was penalized for any alleged reporting of ethical breaches in the ZTE matter.
One of Joffe’s supervising partners, David Tetrick, also advised Joffe at his fall 2016 review that “his career had plateaued, that he had failed to meaningfully participate in his own career development and that his overall performance was inconsistent with the firm’s expectations,” according to the response.
Messages left for counsel for the firm and Joffe on Monday were not immediately returned.
Joffe is represented by Andrew M. Moskowitz of Javerbaum Wurgaft Hicks Kahn Wikstrom & Sinins PC.
King & Spalding is represented by Joseph Baumgarten and Pinchos Goldberg of Proskauer.
The case is David A. Joffe v. King & Spalding LLP, case number 1:17-cv-03392, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
--Additional reporting by Vin Gurrieri. Editing by Philip Shea.
