• Home
  • News
  • Fortune 500
  • Tech
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Lifestyle
  • Rankings
  • Multimedia

Civil suit against Milberg Weiss is score-settling

By
Roger Parloff
Roger Parloff
Down Arrow Button Icon
By
Roger Parloff
Roger Parloff
Down Arrow Button Icon
August 7, 2007, 12:34 PM ET

“We hate them,” says class-action lawyer Russel “Cap” Beatie, Jr., referring to his competitors at the now-indicted firm of Milberg Weiss. “We’d like to step out into the back alley and shoot it out with them.”

Beatie, of Beatie & Osborn, filed last week’s class-action civil RICO suit against Milberg Weiss (the WSJ’s law blog item about it is here), which he candidly characterizes as “in the nature of a religious crusade.” Blustery and profane, Beatie says he blames Milberg Weiss for blackening the reputations of all class-action firms, thereby strengthening the hand of tort reformers. But there’s little question that his suit is even more personal than that.

The named plaintiffs in Beatie’s suit are six members of class actions in which Milberg Weiss served as lead counsel. In part, the complaint repeats, of course, the charges contained in the government’s May 2006 federal indictment, which alleges that the firm secretly paid named plaintiffs in more than 150 cases to induce them to neglect their duty to look after the interests of absent class members.

But Beatie’s suit also goes beyond the indictment, showcasing charges in which the most obviously injured parties (assuming there was wrongdoing) were Milberg Weiss’s rival firms in the class action bar — like Beatie & Osborn, for instance. (Neither Beatie’s firm nor any other plaintiffs firm is actually named as a plaintiff, however.) Beatie claims that Milberg Weiss repeatedly inflated its clients’ losses in court filings in order to trick the judge into appointing it “lead counsel” in the case. The lead counsel controls the case and gets the lion’s share of the attorneys fees. Beatie’s suit alleges misconduct along these lines in shareholder litigation involving Network Associates (MFE), Oxford Health Plans (UNH), Safeskin Corp. (KMB), Linux VA (LNUX), Aurura Foods, Chubb (CB), Waste Management Inc. (WMI), MicroStategy (MSTR), Sonus Networks (SONS), and Organogenesis. Beatie’s firm had unsuccessfully sought lead counsel status in at least three of these cases.

Two Milberg Weiss spokespersons failed to respond to emails left Friday seeking comment. (The firm’s position on the indictment is laid out at MilbergWeissJustice.com. There it proposes as the firm’s calling card: “Committed to the Truth.”)

In fairness, computation of losses is often not simple — clients may have made lots of buys and sales during the class period, for instance, and some of them may have held short positions as well as long positions. Honest mistakes undoubtedly occur.

When class actions are initiated, many law firms will usually file very similar complaints, all vying to represent the same class of shareholders. Until 1995, the first to file suit had an advantage in winning the lead counsel designation, resulting in an unseemly “race to the courthouse.” In an attempt to end that phenomenon, a 1995 federal reform law dictated that, beginning in 1996, the law firm that represented the plaintiff with the largest claimed losses was now supposed to win lead counsel status, all things being equal.

Accordingly, one of the first things that happens in a class action filed today is that the rival plaintiffs firms submit “certificates of loss” purporting to set out their clients’ losses in share value during the class period. But, in practice, the accuracy of these certificates tends to rely on the honor system, since the depositions and document production that are needed to verify or disprove their accuracy usually will not occur until many months after the lead counsel has already been selected. By that time the lead counsel is already deeply steeped in the minutiae of the case, and the rivals firms are long gone from the scene. If an error in a certificate comes to light at that late date, a judge may be loath to throw a wrench into everything by forcing a expensive, time-consuming change in counsel.

In the MicroStrategy case, for instance, Judge T.S. Ellis III of Alexandria, Virginia, chose Milberg Weiss as co-lead counsel in 2000 because its client, a union pension fund, claimed $610,000 in losses — the most among institutional clients vying for the lead plaintiff role. Many months later, though, when the fund was being prepared for depositions, Milberg Weiss said it discovered that the fund’s losses were actually only $80,000. Judge Ellis acknowledged that, if not for the mistake, he never would have appointed Milberg Weiss co-lead counsel. Nevertheless, he also found that Milberg Weiss’s error was “innocent, an act of negligence rather than bad faith,” and imposed a very modest penalty on the firm — about $50,000 out of a $25 million fee.

Evidently Beatie hopes that in light of the government’s criminal allegations — e.g., the secret safe in the credenza (see here), the cash passing under the table at a Howard Johnson’s (see here), etc. — Milberg Weiss may lose the benefit of the doubt that it has previously enjoyed.

RICO suits offer plaintiffs the prospect of treble damages, and the number Beatie hopes to multiply by 3 would not just be the $11 million in kickbacks that Milberg Weiss allegedly paid to three professional plaintiffs, according to the indictment, but the entire $216 million the firm recovered in fees from those cases. (Each of those benchmarks may be low, since the government has now located at least three additional plaintiffs in Florida whom it claims were also regularly paid by Milberg Weiss, according to the statement of facts submitted in connection with David Bershad’s guilty plea last month. See here.)

Losing your entire fee used to be the standard penalty for disloyalty to a client, regardless of whether the client was harmed, according to ethics professor Stephen Gillers of New York University Law School. In the last 15-20 years, however, many courts have softened that draconian rule, Gillers continues, and they now may consider the extent of the misconduct, whether it was intentional, and the evidence, if any, of actual harm. Since class members’ settlement awards in all these cases were ultimately approved as “fair” by the presiding judges, actual harm may be difficult to prove here.

About the Author
By Roger Parloff
See full bioRight Arrow Button Icon

Latest in

InnovationBrainstorm Design
Procurement execs often don’t understand the value of good design, experts say
By Angelica AngDecember 8, 2025
10 minutes ago
Personal Financemortgages
Current mortgage rates report for Dec. 8, 2025: Rates hold steady with Fed meeting on horizon
By Glen Luke FlanaganDecember 8, 2025
45 minutes ago
Personal FinanceReal Estate
Current ARM mortgage rates report for Dec. 8, 2025
By Glen Luke FlanaganDecember 8, 2025
45 minutes ago
Personal FinanceReal Estate
Current refi mortgage rates report for Dec. 8, 2025
By Glen Luke FlanaganDecember 8, 2025
45 minutes ago
CryptoBinance
Binance has been proudly nomadic for years. A new announcement suggests it’s finally chosen a headquarters
By Ben WeissDecember 7, 2025
5 hours ago
Big TechStreaming
Trump warns Netflix-Warner deal may pose antitrust ‘problem’
By Hadriana Lowenkron, Se Young Lee and BloombergDecember 7, 2025
9 hours ago

Most Popular

placeholder alt text
Real Estate
The 'Great Housing Reset' is coming: Income growth will outpace home-price growth in 2026, Redfin forecasts
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
AI
Nvidia CEO says data centers take about 3 years to construct in the U.S., while in China 'they can build a hospital in a weekend'
By Nino PaoliDecember 6, 2025
2 days ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
The most likely solution to the U.S. debt crisis is severe austerity triggered by a fiscal calamity, former White House economic adviser says
By Jason MaDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Economy
JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon says Europe has a 'real problem’
By Katherine Chiglinsky and BloombergDecember 6, 2025
1 day ago
placeholder alt text
Politics
Supreme Court to reconsider a 90-year-old unanimous ruling that limits presidential power on removing heads of independent agencies
By Mark Sherman and The Associated PressDecember 7, 2025
17 hours ago
placeholder alt text
Big Tech
Mark Zuckerberg rebranded Facebook for the metaverse. Four years and $70 billion in losses later, he’s moving on
By Eva RoytburgDecember 5, 2025
3 days ago
Rankings
  • 100 Best Companies
  • Fortune 500
  • Global 500
  • Fortune 500 Europe
  • Most Powerful Women
  • Future 50
  • World’s Most Admired Companies
  • See All Rankings
Sections
  • Finance
  • Leadership
  • Success
  • Tech
  • Asia
  • Europe
  • Environment
  • Fortune Crypto
  • Health
  • Retail
  • Lifestyle
  • Politics
  • Newsletters
  • Magazine
  • Features
  • Commentary
  • Mpw
  • CEO Initiative
  • Conferences
  • Personal Finance
  • Education
Customer Support
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Customer Service Portal
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Use
  • Single Issues For Purchase
  • International Print
Commercial Services
  • Advertising
  • Fortune Brand Studio
  • Fortune Analytics
  • Fortune Conferences
  • Business Development
About Us
  • About Us
  • Editorial Calendar
  • Press Center
  • Work At Fortune
  • Diversity And Inclusion
  • Terms And Conditions
  • Site Map

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.