X

Lawyer Found Guilty of Client-Poaching Scheme Ordered to Pay $2.3M in Damages

PAYMENT OF DAMAGES

A former Florida Injury Law Firm associate has been ordered to pay $2.3m in damages after he was found guilty of violating his employment contract by stealing the firm’s most valuable clients. Lawyer Thomas P. Schmitt was accused of having a “modus operandi of gaining employment at law firms with the undisclosed intent of stealing as many clients as possible.” Schmitt was also accused of forging an electronic signature of the firm’s founder, Johnny A. Pineyro, and using it to lure away more than 50 clients with cases worth millions of dollars. The case settled for $1m just one week after being transferred to Schmitt.

The employment agreement had stated that Schmitt could not contact the firm’s clients at the end of his employment unless the client first contacted him. If Schmitt were working on a client file, the client would be notified by a joint letter with the firm. In cases initiated by the firm, it would be entitled to 80% of all fees generated. If Schmitt originated a client, he would owe 50% to 60% of the net fee to the firm, depending on the representation length.

The Florida Injury Law Firm and its founder, Johnny A. Pineyro, were plaintiffs in the case. Schmitt said he’s not done with the legal fight, telling the ABA Journal, “It’s not over until it’s over.”

The suit had also alleged that Schmitt had left important information off his resume and falsely claimed that he had studied at Oxford University on a Rhodes scholarship. Pineyro said that he wanted firms to know about the importance of performing background checks before hiring new lawyers.

The case shows the importance of having clear employment agreements that protect the interests of both the employer and the employee. It also highlights the importance of conducting thorough background checks before hiring new staff.

In this case, the damages awarded to the Florida Injury Law Firm serve as a warning to other firms that may be tempted to take shortcuts when hiring new staff or enforcing their employment agreements. In the long run, it is better to invest the time and resources needed to ensure that all staff is appropriately vetted and that employment agreements are clear and enforceable.

In conclusion, the Florida Injury Law Firm’s victory, in this case, sends a clear message that stealing clients is unacceptable and that there will be consequences for those who engage in such behavior. It also serves as a reminder that firms must be diligent in their hiring practices and enforce their employment agreements to avoid similar problems in the future.

Rachel E: