Lawyer Accuses Wal-Mart of ‘Counsel Shopping’ for Low Settlement
Lawyers discussed competing settlement offers last week in an employee suit against Wal-Mart, leading the lawyer for the two named plaintiffs to accuse the company of “counsel shopping.”
Carolyn Beasley Burton, who represents the named plaintiffs in the Massachusetts suit filed eight years ago, was first working on the case through the law firm of famous class-action lawyer Fred Furth, writes Boston Globe columnist Steven Syre. She stayed on the case, and so did Furth, who says his firm has spent $7 million funding the case alleging improper labor practices.
Burton recently told Wal-Mart she would settle the case for $50 million, while Furth came to court with a proposed settlement of $20 million to $40 million, the story says. Judge Thomas Murtagh refused to accept the settlement proposal and told the lawyers to prepare for trial.
Now Burton claims Wal-Mart was “counsel shopping,’’ playing lawyers off each other to gain a low settlement. Wal-Mart, which is represented by Greenberg Traurig, disagrees with the characterization, the American Lawyer reported last week.
Murtagh appointed Burton lead counsel at the same hearing. Furth reacted to the decision in an interview with the American Lawyer. “Now we’ll find out, can [the Burton group] get a better settlement, and if they don’t, can they try a case and win,” he said.
