A recent NLJ story, “Orrick Settles Fee Fight With Doll Maker; Terms Secret,” reports that Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe has settled a fee dispute with former client MGA Entertainment Inc. over work associated with a copyright lawsuit against Mattel Inc. over the Bratz doll.  No dollar amount was placed on the settlement, which was disclosed to U.S. District Judge David Carter, who is overseeing MGA’s case against Mattel, maker of the Bratz doll line.  In a January 25 filing, Orrick has indicted that an arbitrator had granted a partial award earlier that month of $23 million, which amounted to a lien on the judgment.

The fee dispute settlement came as Carter deliberated over whether MGA was entitled to amend its complaint against Mattel to include allegations that that it stole trade secrets by having masquerading employees show up at trade fairs.  In 2011, a federal jury awarded MGA $88.5 million on those allegations.  Carter later increased the award to $310 million, including a corrected verdict of $85 million plus an additional $85 million in exemplary damages and $140 million in attorney fees and costs.

Carter also is deliberating about who gets access to $137 million in attorney fees and costs upheld by the Ninth Circuit.  Most of those fees dealt with MGA’s defense against Mattel’s failed claims of copyright infringement.  On remand, MGA, its insurers, and Orrick renewed their over fees.  Mattel brought a motion to enjoin those parties from enforcing the judgment and collecting on a $315 million bond it had posted pending its appeal.  Mattel insisted that it could pay the fee award upheld by the Ninth Circuit but feared the multiple parties could force it to pay more than the $137 million.

During a February 26 hearing, Carter asked both sides to submit additional briefing on whether the money should be placed in an equitable constructive trust set up by the court in light of the dispute.  Supporting the trust were Mattel and MGA’s insurers, which argued in June 12 briefs that the entire $137 million fee award should be set aside in the trust.  They argued that, including Orrick’s $23 million partial award, the total amount MGA owes third parties is $161 million – more than the actual fee award.  MGA opposed the trust.

In MGA’s case against Orrick, MGA attorney Edmond Connor of Connor Fletcher & Williams, had challenged the firm’s initial arbitration award in court documents in Orange County.  Orrick sought to confirm the arbitration award.  On April 23, Orange County Superior Court Judge William Monroe dismissed Orrick’s petition to confirm the partial award “because the Panel has not determined any, much less all, the issues that are necessary to the resolution of the essential dispute between MGA Petitioners and Respondent Orrick.”