Law.com
  • News
    • Newswire
    • Supreme Court
    • International
    • Legal Blog Watch
    • The Hot Seat
    • Video
  • Publications
    • The American Lawyer
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Law Technology News
    • The National Law Journal
    • New York Law Journal
    • New Jersey Law Journal
    • Connecticut Law Tribune
    • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
    • Daily Business Review (FL)
    • Delaware Law Weekly
    • Daily Report (GA)
    • The Recorder (CA)
    • Texas Lawyer
    • Publication E-Alerts
    • More Publication Sites
  • Legal Research & Directories
    • Books Online
    • Smart Litigator
    • ALM Experts
    • Verdict Search
    • Court Reporters
    • Legal Dictionary
    • LegalTech® Directory
    • Newsletters
    • More Directories
  • Surveys, Lists & Rankings
    • Amlaw 100
    • NLJ 250
    • Global 100
    • The A-List
    • ALM Legal Intelligence
    • Surveys
    • Top Rated Lawyers
    • More Lists & Rankings
  • Special Reports
  • lawjobs.com
  • LawCatalog Store
  • CLE & Events
    • CLE Center
    • ALM Events
    • LegalTech
    • Virtual LegalTech
    • Insight Legal Events
    • Webinars
Home
 
Article
Twitter LinkedIn RSS
Sign Up for Newsletters

Law.com Home > Milberg Agrees to Pay $75 Million in Settlement Over Kickback Scheme

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Milberg Agrees to Pay $75 Million in Settlement Over Kickback Scheme

By Anthony Lin All Articles 

New York Law Journal

June 17, 2008

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Federal prosecutors today reached a settlement with class action law firm Milberg, four of whose former name partners have pleaded guilty in the past year to criminal charges relating to the payment of kickbacks to individual plaintiffs in shareholder cases.

The deal calls for the New York-based firm to pay $75 million in fines in exchange for the dropping of criminal charges. That amount is to be paid in installments through 2012, but the schedule will be accelerated if Milberg's revenues exceed $40 million in a single quarter or $120 million over four quarters.

According to the agreement filed in Los Angeles federal court, Milberg "acknowledges and accepts responsibility" for the actions of the former partners -- Melvyn I. Weiss, William S. Lerach, David J. Bershad and Steven G. Schulman, who have pleaded guilty to participating in the kickback scheme.

But federal prosecutors also stated their "belief that no attorney currently a partner or associate with Milberg LLP is culpable with respect to the Investigated Conduct."

Sanford Dumain, a Milberg management committee member, said Monday the firm had retained counsel to explore recouping some of the $75 million through litigation against its former partners. He declined to provide further details on those efforts.

Lawyers for the four ex-partners have either declined comment or did not return calls.

The firm has already placed the first installments of the fine, totaling over $22 million, in escrow, he said.

Dumain said the important thing was that the firm would now be able to move forward.

"It's very important to us to get this behind us and have the recognition that none of the current partners and associates had anything to do with the misconduct," he said.

As part of the settlement, the firm will also be required to maintain for an additional two years a "best practices" monitoring program it instituted several months prior to its 2006 indictment. The program, overseen by former federal prosecutor Bart M. Schwartz, is intended to ensure that the firm engages in no further misconduct in its handling of client matters.

That misconduct, which spanned over 25 years, helped make Milberg the dominant firm when it came to securities fraud class actions.

At its height before a 2004 bi-coastal split, the firm then known as Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach was behind more than half of all securities class actions. The firm became Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman after Lerach left to found the San Diego-based firm now known as Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins.

Shareholder suits often settle for millions and even billions of dollars, reaping large contingent fees for those plaintiffs firms designated as lead counsel. As a result, there is intense competition among firms to be so named.

Milberg's kickback scheme, which paid named plaintiffs 10 percent of legal fees in a case, allowed it to maintain a stable of such plaintiffs in order to swiftly bring claims on behalf of shareholders. Prior to the enactment of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the first law firm to file such an action could count on winning lead counsel status.

Such agreements are illegal because named plaintiffs in class action suits are not permitted to have interests above those of other class members, to whom they owe a fiduciary duty. The named plaintiffs also falsely certified to courts that they were not receiving any payment for their services.

In the statement of facts accompanying the settlement agreement, Milberg today admitted earning around $239 million in legal fees on cases where plaintiffs were paid. The firm also admitted it concealed the fact that it illegally paid frequent class action expert witness John Torkelsen on a contingent-fee basis.

The firm further admitted kickbacks were paid to a number of New York-area stockbrokers who referred clients to act as named plaintiffs in Milberg cases. One of these, a lawyer-turned-stockbroker named Paul L. Tullman, received almost $9 million in payments from the firm between 1981 and 2005.

When Tullman received his last payment, the investigation of the firm's activities was already several years old. Prosecutors brought their first indictment in June 2005 against Seymour Lazar, one of the plaintiffs who received kickbacks, and Paul T. Selzer, a lawyer who allegedly facilitated the payments. Lazar and two other kickback recipients ultimately pleaded guilty in the case. With Milberg's settlement, Selzer will remain the only defendant.

LEAD FIGURES PLEAD GUILTY

It initially appeared the firm's two leading figures, Weiss and Lerach, who split off from Milberg to form his own California firm in 2004, had escaped prosecution when, in May 2006, only the firm and Bershad and Schulman were indicted.

But after Bershad agreed to plead guilty last July, Lerach announced he too would be pleading guilty. Weiss was indicted in October 2007 and pleaded guilty in March. He was sentenced earlier this month to 30 months in prison. Lerach is already serving the two-year sentence he received in February.

Milberg saw a significant number of its lawyers depart the firm in the wake of its indictment, and the ongoing prosecution raised the possibility that the law firm might disintegrate in a manner similar to accounting firm Arthur Andersen, which fell apart after its indictment for obstruction of justice in the Enron scandal.

But Dumain said Monday that Milberg, which has around 60 lawyers, remains one of the largest law firms in the securities class action bar.

"I think it's remarkable how many people have stayed here and gotten good results," he said. He also said the firm continued to have resources, like its own team of investigators, that other plaintiffs firms lacked.

Following its indictment, the firm was also fired by some client pension funds and removed from lead counsel roles by some courts. Dumain acknowledged these setbacks but said far more frequent had been instances in which Milberg had carried on with its work on matters while under indictment.

Barbara Hart, the head of securities litigation for competing firm Lowey, Dannenberg, Cohen & Hart, said Milberg had many young, talented lawyers and said she expected they would "put their best efforts forward to win new business."

But she said the firm's recent past will probably continue to be a factor with clients, as well as with courts.

"I don't imagine it will make things easier for them," she said.

For many in the legal community it will also be difficult to imagine the new Milberg carrying forward without Weiss at the helm. But Dumain said the firm had been planning for the 72-year-old Weiss' eventual retirement even before his indictment.

Milberg was represented by William W. Taylor of Zuckerman Spaeder; Bryan Daly of Mayer Brown and former U.S. assistant attorney general Viet Dinh.



Subscribe to New York Law Journal

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins
  • Mayer Brown
  • Zuckerman Spaeder
  • Milberg

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Milberg Weiss Bershad Hynes & Lerach
  • Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman
  • Enron
  • Lowey, Dannenberg, Cohen & Hart

Key categories

    
  • White Collar Crime
  • Law Firm Administration

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit
    •      
  2. Largest State Poised to Require Practical Skills Training
    •      
  3. Lawyers' Pro Bono Hours, Contributions, Will Be Public
    •      
  4. The 2013 Am Law 100
    •      
  5. Judge Strikes Law Banning Demonstrations at Supreme Court
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of HUD Forms Draws Supreme Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Restaurant in Union Square Park Ruled Permissible
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Magistrate Judge Finds Few Benefits to Class in Settlement
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Third Circuit Could See Rise in Pay-for-Delay Litigation

Cozen Debt Forgiveness Is Campaign Contribution, Court Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Boosting Lawyers And Saving Lives
  •      
    • Subscription Required

11th Circuit Conflicted On Juveniles Stance
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media