Lawyer’s Affair Leads to Firm Breakup, $2M Verdict

Law Firms

Lawyer’s Affair Leads to Firm Breakup, $2M Verdict

Posted Jul 14, 2008, 03:26 pm CDT
By Martha Neil

In a civil theft verdict that could hit two attorneys with some $2 million in damages, a Florida jury found late last month that two longtime associates of a well-known Tampa personal injury attorney essentially stripped the owner of their former firm of much of his practice.

The verdict—which was originally higher—was upheld Friday: Richard Mulholland's former associates, William Winters, 48, and Marc Yonker, 41, asked Hillsborough Circuit Judge Richard Nielsen to declare a mistrial or set aside the jury's verdict, recounts the Tampa Tribune. "Nielsen declined to do so but did reduce the jury's verdict from $1 million to about $575,000. Then, per the law, he tripled those damages to $1.7 million."

It took seven years for the case to wend its way through the legal system to trial, starting with the two associates' ambition for a bigger role in the firm and an apparent affair between Winters and a then 29-year-old paralegal, Betsy Chapa, both of whom were married, reports the St. Petersburg Times in a lengthy feature article.

Ordered by Mulholland, who is now 74, to fire her, because it would be harder to replace an associate than a paralegal, Winters did so. But at that point, according to Mulholland's complaint and the jury's verdict, his former paralegal and the two associates began copying his high-dollar case files in preparation to form a new law firm, according to the Times.

Chapa also admittedly hacked into her former law firm's computer after she was fired and changed client information to prevent Mulholland from being able to reach his clients once the two associates left. In their testimony, they denied that she did so at their request.

Winters and Yonker, who had been with Mulholland since 1985 and 1995, respectively, according to his complaint, didn't grant interviews to the Times. But their sworn statements "suggest they may well have felt exploited during their time in the older attorney's firm," the newspaper recounts. "Mulholland personally handled perhaps half a dozen cases at a time; Yonker alone was assigned to as many as 350. By most accounts, Mulholland rarely appeared in court, conducted a deposition, or fielded clients' calls. But when the fees rolled in, roughly two-thirds of that revenue went to him and the firm."

Says Mulholland, who insists the case was never merely about the money, "They basically took 40 years of my work"—snapping his fingers—"just like that."

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by bob - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 42 minutes ago

Blah, these guys got screwed harder then that intern on a Friday night when madam Winters was out of town for the weekend. Mulholland, should have been involved in his own law practice, maybe then he would know the phone number of his own clients!! 40 years of his work? Iol I call bullshit!
Posted by Allen J Genaldi - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 38 minutes ago

Another Tampa landmark dismantled.
Posted by Chris - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 30 minutes ago

I tend to agree with Bob. Yonker had 350 cases at a time and Mulholland had 6??? Mulholland is upset not because he lost 40 years of “his” work, but because his absence was exploited against him.
Posted by Tampa Ex - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 21 minutes ago

Don’t like working conditions? Move. But don’t steal your employer’s stuff. Period. Jury in Tampa made a good decision.
Posted by Barry - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 19 minutes ago

So even though these guys were"exploited", it was OK for them to steal the bosses client files?
Being the owner means you get to do what you want. Being the employee means you get to do what the boss tells you and if you don’t like it, you leave.
Posted by A Stetson Law Alum - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 15 minutes ago

Well, at least that’s one less horrible P.I. law firm commercial that we’ll have to endure on TV down here in Tampa…
Posted by Charlote - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 10 minutes ago

If you will steal from a boss you will steal from a client. We have had them leave here both ways. We send work to the good-guys and are abruptly silent about the others.
Posted by HVB - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 9 minutes ago

Winters and Chapa showed their true colors by having an affair while married (I guess that’s redundant). If they cheat that way, what’s to be trusted? There are right and wrong ways to deal with employment and compensation issues.
Posted by Al Veoli - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 9 hours, 6 minutes ago

Do we really care about humpin’ trashy lawyers in Florida? Do lawyers need to hear about this? We want substance, not sleaze from the home of the TV show cops. If there were good-lookin’ lawyers, this wouldn’t happen.
Posted by Older and Wiser Guy - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 8 hours, 57 minutes ago

Boy, there are no good guys in this story. We have three thieves, two adulterers, and one laz, greedy slavedriver.

But, the verdict is obviously correct. The associates should have just said take this job and shove it, old man, not steal his files.
Posted by bobie ray - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 8 hours, 40 minutes ago

disbar them from ever practicing again....we don’t need these kind of lawyers
Posted by Igor - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 8 hours, 30 minutes ago

This story raises multiple questions. How do you steal business from a personal injury attorney? It’s not like these are return clients. Did the jury just guesstimate the value of the open files? Why didn’t these guys just go get their own 1-800 number and promise money for misery? How did these guys think they would get away with this? The old man would just go-Wow all the information in my active files is missing I wonder what happened- maybe it was those two guys that worked here forever and recently quit? Wouldn’t the old man have a lien on all the files anyway?
Posted by SoonToBe - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 8 hours, 17 minutes ago

Wow. And this is what leaves a bad taste in the mouth of the public that views our profession with such disdain…
Posted by Jade - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 6 hours, 8 minutes ago

I agree with Tampa X and others. If you don’t like the job, go elsewhere. Don’t steal clients. Mullholland can run HIS PRACTICE as HE CHOOSES. IF you’re dumb enough to do all the work for not enough money that’s your own fault.
Posted by Brad - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 5 hours, 12 minutes ago

I dont know how these guys still have their law license
Posted by Marissa - 2 months, 2 weeks, 6 days, 51 minutes ago

Mullholland should have been more involved in his own practice? Please!!! His name is on the door and it’s his practice. You don’t like the fact that you have 350 cases and he has 6 go work somewhere else. Clearly, Mullholland was not getting all of the money or else these jokers would not have stuck around for 16 and 6 years respectively. You don’t like how someone is operating their law firm...you LEAVE!!!
Posted by Wynstone - 2 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 21 hours, 21 minutes ago

Igor, personal injury lawyers do have return clients. They’re called insurance companies.
Posted by kay sieverding - 2 months, 2 weeks, 4 days, 6 hours, 17 minutes ago

Did the associates have a non-compete agreement? What they took were “leads”, the names of potential customers, right? What happens when a stockbroker or a real estate agent takes leads to a new position? I thought it was standard practice for a stockbroker to take customer names when switching firms.
Posted by Charles - 2 months, 2 weeks, 4 days, 1 hour, 32 minutes ago

Lots of people can work up cases. Few can bring them in. If the cases were coming in because of Mulholland, then the fee allocation was fair.
Posted by associate - 2 months, 2 weeks, 3 days, 5 hours, 1 minute ago

Kay, you’re a danger to yourself and others. Get out of law, or get a degree.

Theft of trade secrets has never been ok. There is a whole stream of cases routinely finding against people for stealing trade secrets, even if they just memorize client lists. These people are typically professional trustees and other investment types, or salesmen.

Further, there is no such thing as non-compete agreements for attorneys. Any restriction on practice is unenforceable. This is to allow free access to the attorney of a client’s choice.
Posted by Alcindoro - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 23 hours, 23 minutes ago

"Older and Wiser” (#10) got it right.

ABA scoops the Inquirer once more.
Posted by Kay Sieverding - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 4 hours, 24 minutes ago

To # 20
Why would it matter whether a noncompete agreement involved a lawyer, a stock broker, a physicians., a landscaper, or a hair cutter? You could argue from the customer’s viewpoint that all involve unique services and that they should be able to hire whomever they want, someone who is familiar with them and their special needs. How do stock brokers get away with taking “their” customer lists to a new position?
Posted by FL Law - 2 months, 2 weeks, 1 day, 1 hour, 52 minutes ago

Kay, #20 has it right. The difference is the fact that lawyers are governed by Rules of Professional Conduct which forbid a noncompete agreement. Try law school, or perhaps just not posting on topics on which you are uninformed. I defer to the old adage: “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.”

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Law Firms