Norton Rose unsuccessful in effort to stymie discovery

As reported earlier, GLLLP client New Canaan Capital Management LLC is suing the law firm giant Norton Rose Fulbright LLP and other related parties for, among other things, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty.  In essence, and we encourage folks to read the Complaint itself, New Canaan alleges that one or more lawyers affiliated with the old line New York powerhouse law firm Chadbourne & Parke, now a part of mega-firm Norton Rose, caused great harm to New Canaan, which, the Complaint alleges, is a former Chadbourne client.  Applying the special rules of the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York,  which differ from ordinary New York State Court rules, GLLLP began the process of extracting discovery from Norton Rose and the other defendants.  In an effort to block that discovery and effectively stall the case, Norton Rose went to Supreme Court Justice Eileen Bransten and asked her to ice GLLLP’s discovery demands until Norton Rose’s motion to dismiss — which GLLLP has forcefully opposed — is decided.  Justice Bransten explained to the Norton Rose senior partner arguing the case that he had given her no reason to deviate from the general rule in the Commercial Division that discovery proceeds while motions to dismiss are pending.  Accordingly, Justice Bransten rejected the Norton Rose attempt to stay discovery.  We will update this post further when the formal order is issued and the transcript of the hearing is made  available.  There are excerpts from the transcript that, separate and apart from their significance to the case, are, in our opinion, worthwhile from a purely educational perspective.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *