Winston & Strawn Settles Claim with GE Rainmaker

Law Firm News

Winston & Strawn has settled on the eve of trial a lawsuit brought against it by a New York partner who claimed the firm broke a deal to exempt him from "decompression," a policy sharply reducing partners' pay after age 65, writes the New York Law Journal.

Throughout the 1990s, Anthony LoFrisco, 74, was one of the law firm's highest-paid partners, based largely on his close relationship with former General Electric (GE) chairman John "Jack" Welch. According to a 1994 agreement with Chicago-based Winston, LoFrisco was to be paid an amount equal to at least 13% of the firm's GE billings.

That arrangement expired in 2001 but LoFrisco claimed in his 2003 lawsuit that the firm agreed that year to extend the deal and exempt him from decompression. He accused the firm of reneging the following year, with decompression reducing his pay from $2.3m (£1.1m) in 2002 to $350,000 (£170,000) in 2004.

Trial in the matter was scheduled to begin Monday before Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Helen Freedman. But the parties said in a joint statement yesterday (20 November) that they reached an “amicable settlement” of the dispute on 10 November. The terms of the settlement are confidential.

As a result of the settlement, the parties stated: "LoFrisco's lawsuit will be dismissed and he will resign from the firm on 26 November, 2007."

Both Winston's lawyer, Philip Forlenza of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, and LoFrisco's lawyer, Elkan Abramowitz of Morvillo Abramowitz Grand Iason Anello & Bohrer, declined to comment further.

The settlement ends an unusual suit that had drawn much attention to the issue of how firms handle aging rainmakers, many more of whom are now challenging firm policies that envision retirement at age 65 or earlier. In recent years, many firms have shown greater willingness to waive decompression, mandatory retirement or similar policies for older partners still responsible for large amounts of business.

The sensitive issue of how to manage aging partnerships was thrust into the spotlight last month after Sidley Austin agree to pay $27.5m (£13.1m) to settle an age discrimination claim with 32-former partners who were forced to give up equity partner status in 1999.

Related listings

  • Ringler Kearney Alvarez Announces New Partner

    Ringler Kearney Alvarez Announces New Partner

    Law Firm News 11/18/2007

    Ringler Kearney Alvarez is pleased to announce that Paul G. Szumiak has joined the Firm as a partner, and Richard L. Rosett and C. Jerry Kutner have been announced as Of Counsel. Ringler Kearney Alvarez LLP specializes in high value, highly sophistic...

  • Greenberg Traurig named US Law Firm of the Year

    Greenberg Traurig named US Law Firm of the Year

    Law Firm News 11/14/2007

     Greenberg Traurig, an international law firm with offices in Orlando, was named the USA Law Firm of the Year by Chambers and Partners at a Nov. 8 awards ceremony in London. The Chambers Global Awards Program honors excellence in legal services ...

  • Pedley Zielke Gordinier & Pence is Dissolving

    Pedley Zielke Gordinier & Pence is Dissolving

    Law Firm News 11/14/2007

    The Louisville law firm of Pedley Zielke Gordinier & Pence is dissolving at the end of the year. David Pedley, a partner and one of 17 attorneys with the firm, said he and some other staffers will move from their current location in the Meidinger...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.

Business News

New York & New Jersey Family Law Matters We represent our clients in all types of proceedings that include termination of parental rights. >> read