Law firm Proskauer Rose has recently expanded its ongoing trade secrets lawsuit against its former chief operating officer, Jonathan O’Brien. The firm accuses O’Brien of engaging in a scheme to recruit other Proskauer employees to a competitor while violating a court order that mandated the turnover of all proprietary data.
According to Proskauer’s amended complaint filed in Manhattan federal court, O’Brien, who was terminated in December as he prepared to join rival firm, Paul Hastings, retained some of the “purloined” data even after a court-imposed deadline of January 6. The firm alleges that O’Brien deliberately deleted thousands of text messages and emails, including those relevant to the ongoing litigation.
In addition to the allegations of trade secrets misappropriation, Proskauer has now introduced a fraud claim against O’Brien. The firm contends that O’Brien exploited his previous position by causing Proskauer to cover over $150,000 in personal expenses and making charitable donations involving himself and his wife. Proskauer states that it is currently investigating O’Brien’s expenses further.
In response to the amended complaint, O’Brien’s attorney, Russell Beck of Beck Reed Riden, released a statement characterizing the filing as an attempt to generate sensational media coverage. Beck affirmed that O’Brien would respond within the court proceedings.
Mark Goodman, a partner at Debevoise & Plimpton representing Proskauer, refrained from commenting.
Proskauer’s allegations against O’Brien involve the download of 34 gigabytes of data, including sensitive information such as financial performance, client lists, profitability metrics, compensation details, and evaluations of each of Proskauer’s 200-plus partners. The amended complaint further implicates two former Proskauer executives, chief financial officer Leigh Anne Whyte, and one of her subordinates, Jeremy Russo, who were also preparing to join Paul Hastings. While not named as defendants, Whyte and Russo allegedly assisted O’Brien in his actions.
Whyte and Russo have yet to respond to the allegations. Proskauer emphasizes Whyte’s involvement, citing her knowledge of and participation in O’Brien’s misconduct. In a previous filing on January 18, Proskauer referred to Russo as “O’Brien’s co-conspirator.”
The lawsuit asserts that O’Brien and others made efforts to recruit Proskauer employees to Paul Hastings by withholding raises and promotions, aiming to create dissatisfaction among the staff. O’Brien has denied Proskauer’s claims, countering that he downloaded the data with the intention of working during a planned two-week vacation in Mauritius, which coincided with his final days at the firm.
Paul Hastings, the intended destination for O’Brien’s employment, has stated that he will not be joining the firm. Proskauer’s complaint, however, alleges that O’Brien had been in line to receive a base salary of $1.5 million and bonuses totaling $2.2 million from his prospective employer.
Responding to the situation, Paul Hastings released a statement asserting that the firm did not solicit or receive any confidential or proprietary information. They declined to comment further on what they described as “another firm’s personnel dispute.”
As the legal battle continues to unfold, Proskauer remains determined to protect its trade secrets and ensure that any alleged misconduct is appropriately addressed. The case serves as a reminder of the significance of safeguarding proprietary information and the potential consequences individuals and firms may face when such information is misused or disclosed improperly.