|
Case Database
»Compensation/Bonus Cases
Case Date: 1/14/2008
Securities Arbitration Commentator, Inc. Examines L&R's $23 Million Win Against Roberston Stephens
 View Details
 Hide Details [Printer-Friendly View]
Lead counsel Jeffrey L. Liddle won a $14,690,000 arbitration award in favor of 27 former employees of investment bank Robertson Stephens, Inc. for promised 2001 compensation. The case was tried over 79 hearing days beginning in January 2005 and concluding in June 2007, during which testimony was heard from 59 witnesses. Prejudgment interest in the approximate amount of $8,000,000 was also awarded. In the link below read the "Peek Behind an Award" analysis of this case by the editors of the Securities Arbitration Commentator.
Lawyer(s):
Jeffrey L. Liddle
Web Info(URL) www.liddlerobinson.com/pdf/SDOC1553.pdf
Case Date: 7/20/2004
Zubulake v. UBS Warburg
View Details
Hide Details [Printer-Friendly View]
This sex discrimination and retaliation case has generated substantial attention in the general and legal press, particularly because of the groundbreaking rulings the United States District Court in New York has made regarding the discovery of e-mail evidence and the obligations companies have to preserve, in connection with lawsuits, electronically stored documents. The Federal Court has in fact issued five separate, highly significant decisions with respect to this case. The following are links to each of the five decisions:
Zubulake I
Zubulake II
Zubulake III
Zubulake IV
Zubulake V
The following are links to articles that have appeared in the New York Law Journal regarding this case:
- UBS Warburg Sanctioned for Destroying E-Mails in Discrimination Suit (July 21, 2004)
Read it here
- Bank Negligent for Allowing Destruction of E-mail Evidence (October 24, 2003)
Read it here
- Electronic Discovery: N.Y. Judge Juggles Cost Criteria (July 24, 2003)
Read it here
- New Standards for Cost Shifting Proposed in Electronic Discovery (May 14, 2003)
Read it here
Lawyer(s):
Christine A. Palmieri
Judge: Shira A. Scheindlin
Case Date: 3/15/2001
Rodrigo Fernandez Salvador and Robert Link v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Award Amount- $500,000.00
View Details
Hide Details [Printer-Friendly View]
Our clients, Rodrigo Fernandez and Robert Link, worked as financial consultants in Merrill Lynch’s St. Louis, Missouri branch office. On March 15, 2001, following 11 days of hearings, a NYSE arbitration panel based in St. Louis awarded them $500,000.00 in damages on their claim that Merrill Lynch had wrongfully deprived them of compensation for their services in establishing a distribution network for Merrill Lynch’s mutual funds in Ecuador, which where they had extensive professional and personal contacts. The panel also assessed forum fees of $17,100.00 against Merrill Lynch.
Lawyer(s):
Jeffrey L. Liddle
Web Info(URL) www.nyse.com/pdfs/1999-007590.pdf
Case Date: 7/30/1999
David B. Linker v. Koch Investments, Inc.
View Details
Hide Details [Printer-Friendly View]
In a July 30, 1999 Opinion and Order (62 F.Supp.2d 611 (D.Conn. 1999)) the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut denied Koch Investments' motion to dismiss the claims of our client, David B. Linker, who sought promised but unpaid bonus compensation for calendar year 1996. Koch Investments, a subsidiary of the Wichita, Kansas based conglomerate Koch Industries, hired Mr. Linker as a proprietary securities trader. As set forth in the Court's Opinion, Mr. Linker claimed that Koch had promised him a bonus for 1996 in "multiples" of his base salary. Mr. Linker claimed that Koch had agreed to create a bonus pool constituting 15-20% of his trading profits, and that Koch Industries had promised to provide Koch Investments with $100 million in capital for proprietary trading operations, for a minimum of three years, and to permit Koch Investments to leverage that amount up to $1 billion. The Court concluded that Mr. Linker had set forth valid claims, subject to ultimate determination by a jury, for breach of contract, quantum meruit and breach of Connecticut's Wage Law (in connection with the failure to pay him the promised bonus) as well as promissory estoppel and negligent misrepresentation (in connection with Mr. Linker's decision to forego other job opportunities based on the strengths of Koch's promises). Following the Court's decision and before trial, the case settled.
Lawyer(s):
Jeffrey L. Liddle
Michael E. Grenert
|
