Fee Dispute Hotline
(312) 907-7275

Assisting with High-Stakes Attorney Fee Disputes

The NALFA

News Blog

Former Client Questions Goodwin Procter's Fees

May 24, 2011 | Posted in : Billing Practices, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Fee Agreement, Fee Dispute, Fee Dispute Litigation / ADR, Unpaid Fees

A recent Thomson Reuters story, “Wham-O Plays Hardball Over Goodwin Procter Fees” reports that Wham-O has hit Goodwin Procter with a lawsuit that claims the law firm overbilled it by racking up $5 million in legal fees.  The suit stems from Goodwin Procter’s representation of Wham-O in trademark infringement litigation involving its Frisbee, Slip ‘n Slide and Hula Hoop against other toy manufacturers.

The action, filed in California state court, alleged that Goodwin Procter’s fees were “excessive, unreasonable and not necessary” for work billed from January 2009 to April 2010.  Wham-O claimed breach of contract and asked for a declaratory judgment to determine what portion of Goodwin Procter’s $5 million legal bill it owes.  In April, an arbitrator ruled that Wham-O owed Goodwin Procter $4.7 million, but the toymaker has rejected that ruling as nonbinding.  In its suit, Wham-O asked the court for a finding regarding the enforceability of the arbitration clause in the party’s fee agreement.

Goodwin Procter has represented Wham-O in some of its infringement cases of various manufacturers.  In 2007, Wham-O won a $6 million verdict against SLB Toys USA Inc, for infringement of the Slip ‘n Slide in a case that involved the water toy’s signature yellow color.  An appeals court later affirmed the award.