Citing Supreme Court, Bio-Rad Wants Verdict Reduced in Fired General Counsel Case
The memo referred to a recent Supreme Court ruling in "Digital Realty Trust v. Somers."
March 06, 2018 at 05:41 PM
3 minute read
Bio-Rad Laboratories Inc. has asked an appeals court to dismiss one claim and subtract about $2.6 million from the $11 million trial verdict awarded last year to its fired general counsel Sanford “Sandy” Wadler.
Kathleen Sullivan of the New York office of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan filed the memo Monday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Sullivan declined to comment, but her memo cited a recent Supreme Court ruling in Digital Realty Trust v. Somers.
Tim Ernst, executive vice president and general counsel at Bio-Rad, said, “Bio-Rad is gratified that the Supreme Court's decision in Digital Realty Trust eliminates any basis for nearly $3 million of the lower court's judgment, and looks forward to presenting its arguments for reversing the remainder of the judgment.”
San Francisco firm Kerr & Wagstaffe, which is representing Wadler, declined comment.
Wadler had reported to Bio-Rad's audit committee that the company may have engaged in overseas bribery in China. A costly internal investigation found no bribery in China, and Wadler was dismissed a few days later.
He filed suit in 2015 and was awarded $11 million plus attorney fees when the jury found his firing was the result of retaliation. Bio-Rad appealed the verdict last October, citing four errors.
One of the alleged errors was that the trial court allowed the jury to apply the Dodd-Frank Act's whistleblowing provisions to Wadler. The brief argued that Dodd-Frank did not apply when the whistleblower only reported alleged misconduct internally, as Wadler did, and not to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Wadler and the SEC both disagreed.
But on Feb. 21, the U.S. Supreme Court took the same view as Bio-Rad, ruling in a different case that only an individual who reports wrongdoing to the SEC can qualify as a whistleblower under Dodd-Frank.
Bio-Rad had filed its reply brief two weeks earlier in the appeals court, so on Monday Sullivan filed a “citation of supplemental authorities” memo, adding the Supreme Court decision.
The high court ruling “requires reversal of the district court's judgment as to [Wadler's] retaliation claim under Dodd-Frank,” the memo said.
“Accordingly, the judgment on the Dodd-Frank claim, including the $2.96 million in damages attributable solely to that claim, should be reversed,” the memo concluded.
If the Ninth Circuit agrees with Bio-Rad, it is not clear if the court would remand the case back to the trial court, or simply dismiss the Dodd-Frank claim and subtract an appropriate amount from Wadler's previous award.
If the latter, then Bio-Rad could still pursue its appeal of the remaining award.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllOld Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
In-House Gurus Say Inattention to Human Side of Tech Adoption Can Derail Best-Laid Plans
5 minute readNike Promotes Legal Chief to Marketing Chief as New CEO Launches Turnaround
Trending Stories
- 1Trump's Return to the White House: The Legal Industry Reacts
- 2Judicial Face-Off: Navigating the Ethical and Efficient Use of AI in Legal Practice [CLE Pending]
- 3Climate Disputes, International Arbitration, and State Court Limitations for Global Issues
- 4Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 5The Law Firm Disrupted: Big Law Profits Vs. Political Values
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250