A large national retailer.
The client was sued for breach of a lease agreement because it stopped repaying the prior tenant’s build-‐out allowance.
Because the prior tenant no longer existed, the potential pay-‐out over the remainder of the lease was significant, but not so high that the company wanted to engage in extensive litigation. The client wanted a small team that could defend the case on a cost efficient basis. After the litigation started, the client terminated the lease entirely and the amounts involved as potential damages escalated into the millions as a result. The client wanted to control costs and maximize its on-‐going investment so it could make the best possible business decisions as the litigation moved forward.
The same small team handled the expanded litigation. We agreed to a fixed fee per phase of case, with a success bonus. We brought a fraud counterclaim on the client’s behalf to potentially alter the economic dynamics and to create a basis for introducing favorable evidence in front of the jury.
The case was tried to a Los Angeles jury who found for our client on both the landlord’s claim and our client's fraud counterclaim against the landlord. The landlord paid the client an agreed portion of the verdict a week after trial to resolve the case.