|
Lawreader:All States Resources Blogs/ News Archive Civil Litigation Guide CONTACT US Court & Case Info. COURT RULES Dictionary -Legal/ English DOCTRINES & RULES EVIDENCE DIGEST FAQ's about LawReader FORMS MAIN INDEX. FREE LINKS - News - Weather- Lifestyle-Info Games JUDGES HOME PAGE JURY INSTRUCTIONS KBA - Bench & Bar KRS - KAR - US Code - Constitutions KRS ANNOTATED KY Government KY Resources Ky. Court Dockets KY. LAWYER'S DIRECTORY LAW for Non-Lawyers Lawyer's Directory Lawyers Mutual Ins. Co. of Ky. LEGISLATURE - Members, Bills MARRIAGE - KRS CHAPTER 402 MEDIATORS AVAILABLE OLD FORMS PAGE Opinions Ct. of Appeal Opinions Ky. Sup. Ct. POLLS ProTempus Quotes of Appellate Judges REFERENCE LIBRARY SIGN UP - PRICING |
You are here >
Lawyers Mislead Judge -
Judge: Fen-phen lawyers breached duty By Andrew Wolfson Reprinted from The Courier-Journal March 10, 2006 The three lawyers who represented plaintiffs in Judge William Wehr of Wehr ordered the lawyers to surrender the trust's $20 million and place it in escrow so it can be distributed to their former clients if they win a pending suit against the attorneys. The judge noted that the lawyers and other directors of the fund paid themselves more in fees during its first two years than they paid out in grants. Jacqueline McMurtry, of Louisville, who suffered heart damage from taking fen-phen, the once popular diet drug combination, and was represented by Cunningham, said she was "ecstatic" with the ruling. Cunningham and Gallion, of Wehr's findings mirror those in a public reprimand issued last month to the presiding judge in the fen-phen litigation, Senior Judge Joseph F. Bamberger, who resigned rather than face removal from office for approving huge fees for the attorneys and a close friend, trial consultant Mark Modlin. Bamberger approved transfer of the $20 million to the fund, then became one of its paid directors, along with Modlin. The Judicial Conduct Commission said in its reprimand that Bamberger's actions "shocked the conscience." In an order issued Wednesday, Wehr said Cunningham, Gallion and Mills signed contracts with clients limiting their recovery to 33 1/3 percent -- and that they agreed to make no settlements without their clients' consent. But they eventually paid themselves more than 50 percent of the total settlement and falsely told Bamberger it was with their clients' approval, Wehr said. He said the attorneys' defense -- that their pay was approved by "a now reprimanded judge" -- falls short because the lawyers never told Bamberger about the contingency contracts, nor the amount of money being transferred to the Fund for Healthy Living. "To get the vague order of approval from the court," Wehr said, "they represented that all proceeds were handled in accordance with the intentions of the parties. In reality, they were passing out money to themselves and others like it was theirs to do with as they wished." Wehr said the settlement included contingency payments to nonlawyers, including $2 million to Modlin, although such payments cannot be made to nonlawyers in In the original lawsuit, five Kentuckians filed a complaint in 1998 in Boone Circuit Court against American Home Products Corp., which made one of the drugs in fen-phen. Eventually, 431 Kentuckians, opting out of a national case, joined in the In December 2004, after finding that $20 million in supposedly leftover funds had been diverted into the Fund for Healthy Living, a couple dozen plaintiffs filed a new lawsuit against their former lawyers asking for a full accounting of the settlement. The plaintiffs, whose number has grown to about 200, now are asking that the lawyers be forced to give back excessive fees -- and that the money placed in the fund go to their former clients. Wehr scheduled a hearing for April 12 on their motions. According to Wehr's accounting, Cunningham, Gallion and Mills paid themselves $20 million each. A fourth attorney, Stan Chesley of |
|
Disclaimer: We are not attempting to practice law, give advice or represent ourselves as anything more than a resource portal with many unique features. Our design is copyrighted. We have no claim of any affiliation with any linked website nor any liability for anything they may say or do. We, and our contributing authors, offer no warranties of any type, to anyone, about anything express or implied. What you see is what you get, we cannot afford to be your insurer. By going further into this site, you accept this complete waiver of all warranties. © All material copyrighted, LawReader, Inc. 314 7th. St., Carrollton, Ky. 41008 |