Western Sugar Coop. v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Co.

98 F.Supp,3d 1074 (2015)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

The case arises from false advertising claims relating to the marketing of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Ds are manufacturers and trade groups and associations active in the corn and HFCS industry. Ps are sugar industry manufacturers, trade groups, and associations. Ps are represented by the legacy law firm of Squire Sanders & Dempsey, LLP (Squire), filed the lawsuit on April 22, 2011. On September 4, 2012, Ds filed a counterclaim against Ps for false advertising. On June 1, 2014, the law firms of Patton Boggs LLP and Squire combined to form Squire Patton Boggs (SPB). SPB remains Ps' counsel of record. Ds each filed motions to disqualify SPB from representing Ps in this action because SPB is now adverse to both Ingredion and Tate & Lyle-long-standing clients of the legacy firm Patton Boggs. Tate & Lyle entered into an attorney-client relationship with Patton Boggs in February 1998. In late July 2014, D's counsel, Heidi Balsley, contacted SPB attorney, Dan Waltz, who used to work for Patton Boggs. SPB had failed to identify the conflict, despite Tate appearing as a current client in Patton Boggs' database. Tate had been inexplicably omitted from the list of conflicts during the merger. SPB asked Tate for a conflict waiver. As a de facto matter, an ethical wall was in place because the two firms' computer systems had not been integrated and documents were in different offices. Tate would not waive the conflict. SPB sent a letter to Tate enclosing a copy of the 1998 Engagement Letter. The letter provided advance consent from Tate. P proposed to carry forward the simultaneous representations on other matters with two distinct teams of lawyers and an ethical wall. On August 18, 2014, SPB sent a letter to D's counsel terminating its relationship with Tate. Ingredion first retained Patton Boggs in May 2004, and last performed work in September 2013. Ingredion has paid Patton Boggs over $230,000 in legal fees. SPB sent Ingredion's counsel a letter dated July 31, 2014, advising it of the merger and that Squire Sanders had been representing Ps and SPB would continue to do so going forward. SPB informed Ingredion it would need a waiver. Ds each move to disqualify SPB from representing Ps, contending that the merger resulted in SPB simultaneously representing adverse clients.