Register for a free trial!
Call or email us anytime
(805) 484-0333
Search Guide
Today is Friday, April 26, 2024 -

News Articles

Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Floyd, Skeren & Kelly Sues former Managing Attorney for Stealing Client Files

  • Source: WorkCompCentral
  • State: California
  • Topic: Top
  • - Popular with: Legal
  • -  0 shares
The defense firm of Floyd, Skeren & Kelly is accusing one of its former managing attorneys …

Purchase this story for only $7.99!

Add to Cart

For access to all our articles, check out our subscription options.

8 Comments (8 Replies)

Log in to post a comment

Close


Do not post libelous remarks. You are solely responsible for the postings you input. By posting here you agree to hold harmless and indemnify WorkCompCentral for any damages and actions your post may cause.
Dr. Edwin Haronian Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

Workcomp central is always biased... driving the interest of the defense firms and the DWC. Obvious.

Michael Sullivan Office L Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

Something stinks about this... If the decision makers of FSK actually believe this may help them in any way, I would say they must metaphorically be drunk at the wheel blinded by delusions of grandeur- or possibly now too poor to pay attention.

1. "Zero tolerance" means they let the managing associate attorney resign and then PAID HIM $10,000.00 for sexual harassment. Interesting "zero-tolerance policy" to say the least.

2. I forget the exact phrase, but does respondent superior ring a bell? I thought an employer is financially liable for the gender discrimination and harassment of an employee? How can this firm now try to go after their former employee, especially after they paid him to leave? Why not fire him if they wanted to set an example? He would have been denied unemployment because of the "misconduct."

3. Since when are corporate clients property of a law firm? You can't steal a client. The client hires the law firm, the firm does not purchase the client... At least as far as I am aware.

SIDE NOTE:
4. Anyone else notice the attorney representing FSK previously has represented people commonly refer to "WC medical mills" in the past. Roxborough also represented Drobot Jr., the man behind the PACIFIC HOSPITAL OF LONG BEACH scam. How many of FSK's very own clients faced inflated medical invoices and incurred the additional litigation expenses (presumably collected by FSK) to fight those lien charges. Now FSK is PAYING HIM?
Is that a conflict of interest?

Solely from this article, it looks like FSK was initially trying to keep the alleged harassment quiet (because THEY didn't litigate it or do much to defend it as seen by the settlements occurring less than 30-days after the allegations were made, and then the firm PAID the attorney to resign), but once corporate clients followed the attorney, FSK's rainmakers somehow felt justified in re-victimizing the harassed women to gain public sympathy and distract from the real issue- equity partners had their egos bruised by an employee?

How many think FSK would have ever filed this suit if not a single client followed the attorney?

Catherine Graham Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

I totally agree. I could not believe it that FSK would make this so public with, what would appear, the sole intent of destroying Juan's reputation. Even if it is true, what gain would FSK have by shouting it to the comp world in an industry publication?

Renee Sherman Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

If one is innocent you fight it all the way and do not settle. The only rationale for settling would be that you know the evidence is stacked against you. FSK has been in existence almost 30 years so their reputation is well known in that they select the most competent and aggressive attorneys during the hiring process. It is not easy to get hired their. If I was a defense attorney and one of my employees was being a pervert I would do all I could to protect my employees. As far as clients, who out there allows someone to just steal their wallet?

Cheryl Chicaul-Sanchez Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

I thought non-compete clauses were not enforceable in California.

Cheryl Chicaul-Sanchez Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

In one paragraph, it's three employees- so why were settlements paid to a dozen?

If Work Comp Central is going to assist in ruining an attorney's reputation before he has had his day in court, the article should at least have a byline so we can determine if there were 3 employees, a dozen employees or if this was rushed to press a bit hastily.

Eric Schmutz Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

I thought no hate greater than between applicant attorneys in a lien dispute!

Robert Owens Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

Some of my best friends are attorneys for injured workers.

Christina Chornomud Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

Pretty sure the news would get out, they have investigative reporters on this site! And if he did those things he should be publicly shamed! I am glad they are making an example out of him.

Janet Crosby Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

Right on!

Gloria Fernandez Nov 3, 2016 a 2:58 pm PDT

Workcompcentral does not report on every single lawsuit among comp firms and their staffs. The reporting of this story was likely due to a press release from Floyd Skeren motivated likely because it is angry over losing files. So, while it certainly has a right to sue advertising the allegations is not very genteel and I think damages its own reputation more than the former partners' reputation because after all, these are just allegations.

Today’s News

Advertisements

Advertise with us

Now Trending

Jobs

Upcoming Events

  • May 5-8, 2024

    Risk World

    Amplify Your Impact There’s no limit to what you can achieve when you join the global risk managem …

  • May 13-15, 2024

    NCCI's Annual Insights Symposi

    Join us May 13–15, 2024, for NCCI's Annual Insights Symposium (AIS) 2024, the industry’s premier e …

  • May 13-14, 2024

    CSIA Announces the 2024 Annual

    The Board of Managers is excited to announce that the CSIA 2024 Annual Meeting and Educational Con …

Workers' Compensation Events

more

Social Media Links


WorkCompCentral
c/o Business Insurance Holdings, Inc.
PO Box 1010
Greenwich, CT 06836
(805) 484-0333