• October 15, 2010

Minnesota Litigator has covered the case of Michael Afremov vs. Sulloway & Hollis and Michael LaFond vs. Maslon Borman Edelman & Brand, LLP previously.   The claim is for attorney malpractice in connection with alleged advice regarding how to address certain payments alleged to have been kickbacks and then related to Afremov’s subsequent guilty plea for tax fraud.

Claw backs have been in the local news lately.  In the latest news in the Afremov case, plaintiff’s counsel has come to Court having learned that defendants’ malpractice coverage seems to be limited to $5 million.  At a minimum, Afremov will apparently be seeking the fees he paid defendants (and third-party defendant???) of $7.5 million.  So his lawyers have come to Court to request more time in the event they will need to go after money distributed by the defendants to shareholders and employees as fraudulent transfers.  

Plaintiff’s counsel emphasizes that he is not moving to amend to add these “dozens of additional parties” but wants to preserve the right to do so (and, raising the specter of doing so, plaintiff’s counsel might obviously cause defendants and their shareholders to view the risk and financial exposure posed by the case differently).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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