NEW YORK (Legal Newsline) - A federal court in New York has no reason to hear a dispute between two plaintiffs firms over fees, considering they were generated elsewhere.
Judge J. Paul Oetken of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York made that ruling Sept. 12 in a lawsuit brought by Canova Law against Law Office of Ronald A. Marron.
Canova says it is entitled to half of $435,289.80 from a settlement in a California lawsuit but picked New York federal court for its lawsuit. Marron said a clause in their contract required arbitration in California.
"Marron is not subject to the Court's general jurisdiction," Oetken wrote. "There is no allegation that Marron is incorporated in New York, nor that it is at home here.
"The Complaint suggests that Marron had cases in New York courts, but the assertion that, over an unspecified time period, a party litigated 11 total cases in New York state and federal courts does not amount to the required 'continuous and systemic general business contacts' necessary to exercise general jurisdiction over it."
The lawsuit involves fees from a class action against Walmart, Lang Pharma Nutrition, CVS, Walgreen and Meijer Distribution involving a dietary supplement called Co!-10.
That suit said the supplements weren't as effective as advertised. The settlement created a fund for consumers worth more than $1.3 million and generated $435,289.80 in fees and nearly $40,000 in costs.
The Canova firm's lawsuit said it performed substantial work on the case and had a 2017 agreement with Marron to take half of the fees from the case.
Canova never prosecuted the case or appeared as counsel, Marron says, and also never submitted time records for the court's consideration of the attorneys fees award.