[Klein Legal, Flatiron — May 29, 2012, 2:08 PM]
The reclassification notice was three paragraphs. It had been sent to the Greystone v. Atlantic billing address, which was a Klein Legal email account, at 9:14 AM that morning. I had not seen it until 2:08 PM because I had been in a deposition all morning and had not checked the billing inbox, which was a separate inbox from the main correspondence address, which was exactly the kind of administrative architecture that made a 9 AM notice arrive as a 2 PM emergency.
Dear Mr. Klein — pursuant to Section 14 of the Pearson Darby Outside Counsel Harmonization Agreement, the billing classification of Klein Legal's co-counsel engagement on Greystone v. Atlantic has been reviewed and confirmed as follows: Services previously classified as Litigating Co-Counsel (Tier A billing rate) are reclassified as Advisory and Consulting Co-Counsel (Tier B billing rate), effective the next billing cycle. This reclassification represents a 30% reduction from the previously applied rate...
I read it twice.
The Greystone co-counsel arrangement was the most significant revenue item on Klein Legal's books after the Palmer departure. Greystone was ongoing — the Darby merger had complicated the case's corporate structure in ways that made co-counsel necessary for another four to six months. Thirty percent of that revenue was the difference between a firm that was financially stressed and a firm that was in genuine trouble.
I put the phone down and opened my banking app.
$300. One-way.
[+3 LP]
The Library came back online with the flat, slightly cool clarity it had when it was running on purchased LP rather than earned LP — it worked, but there was a quality difference I had learned to distinguish, like the gap between a musician playing for love and playing for fee. Both were professional. One was warmer.
Contract analysis: Greystone co-counsel agreement v. Section 14 harmonization mechanism.
The Library ran for eleven minutes. I read the Greystone agreement while it ran — the original document Harvey's paralegal had sent in March, twelve pages, with the co-counsel terms in Section 3.
The Library returned.
The picture was not good. Section 3 of the Greystone agreement contained a clause — paragraph 3(d), which I had reviewed and signed — that read: Administrative billing management, including rate classification, shall be governed by the policies of the lead counsel's firm as in effect at the time of service. Harvey's firm had been Pearson Hardman when the agreement was signed. Pearson Hardman was now Pearson Darby. Pearson Darby's policies included Section 14.
I had written 3(d) myself, because Harvey had sent me a draft with a similar clause and I had kept it because it seemed neutral. It was neutral when there was one firm and one billing structure. It was not neutral when the firm reorganized and the new structure had a reclassification mechanism I had not read.
The Library tagged the gap in red. Contract vulnerability: 3(d) language. Retroactive application risk.
I stared at it for a second.
The Library was telling me what I already knew: I had made a mistake. The clause was mine. The ambiguity was mine. Darby's reclassification was technically defensible.
Then the Library returned a second overlay, this one in gold. Procedural note: Section 14 confirmation mechanism requires written notice to originating counsel minimum 30 days prior to billing review. Notice received by originating counsel: May 29, 2012. Billing review action date: May 29, 2012. Notice lag: 0 days.
I read it again.
Section 14's own protocol required thirty days' notice before a billing review. The notice and the reclassification had arrived in the same email, on the same morning, with the same effective date. The procedural defect was clear and it was theirs.
I picked up the phone and called Harvey.
The line rang twice. He answered on the third.
"Klein."
"You got the reclassification notice."
"I got it."
"Same terms."
"Same terms."
I let a beat go.
"Are you fighting it," I said.
There was a pause on Harvey's end. Not a long one — Harvey did not use pauses for theater, only for actual recalculation. Three seconds. He was running the math I was already running.
"No," he said.
"It has a procedural defect. Section 14 requires thirty days' notice. They gave us zero."
"I know."
"That's a clean reversal argument."
"It's a clean reversal argument against a firm I'm employed by." He was not cold. He was precise. "Think about what you're asking me to do."
I thought about it for two seconds, which was how long it took to confirm what I already knew: Harvey would not fight the merged firm's billing team while he was pursuing name partner, while the Hessington case was active, while Darby was measuring the internal loyalty of every senior partner. The math was correct. His interests and mine only partially overlapped and this was the point at which they diverged.
"I'm not asking you to do anything," I said.
"Good."
"I'm going to fight it myself."
"Also good." A brief pause. "The notice defect is real. If you can get a partial reversal on procedural grounds, it protects both our rates going forward without either of us going to war on the substance." Another pause, shorter. "Which I would note is also in my interest."
"Noted."
"Good luck."
The line went quiet. Not dropped — Harvey had set the phone down, which was his version of leaving a room at a normal speed. I sat with the receiver in my hand for a second longer than necessary.
Then my laptop pinged with a new email.
The sender was listed as N. Nesbitt — Administrative Liaison, Pearson Darby.
Mr. Klein — Following up on the document protocol harmonization review from last week: I note for administrative clarity that the billing reclassification notice for Greystone v. Atlantic was originated by the Darby International finance team under the Section 14 confirmation protocol, as a finance-team scheduling action, rather than by the managing partner's office or by the Greystone matter partner of record. The procedural instrument governing Section 14 scheduling actions is distinct from the instrument governing partner-directed billing changes. I raise this solely for procedural accuracy. —N. Nesbitt, Darby Administrative Liaison
I read it twice.
Finance-team scheduling action, rather than by the managing partner's office or by the matter partner of record.
Nesbitt was telling me — in the most deniable, most precisely calibrated way he could arrange — that this had not come from Jessica. Not from Darby himself. Not from the Greystone matter partner. It had come from the finance team, operating the Section 14 mechanism as an administrative function.
Which meant: fighting the notice procedure did not require attacking Jessica's authority. It did not require going to war with anyone who had decision-making power over whether Klein Legal had a relationship with the merged firm. It required challenging a finance-team scheduling action that had failed to follow its own protocol.
Different fight. Smaller target. Better odds.
I drafted the counter-position in ninety minutes. The Library supported the procedural angle with three precedents on notice requirements in outside-counsel billing agreements — not strong precedents, but clean ones, and the notice defect was factual rather than interpretive.
Dear Ms. Harrington — Klein Legal acknowledges receipt of the May 29 reclassification notice regarding Greystone v. Atlantic co-counsel billing. We respectfully note that Section 14(c) of the Pearson Darby Outside Counsel Harmonization Agreement requires written notice to originating counsel a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to any billing review action. The May 29 notice provides zero days' prior notice, as it delivers the review action and its effective date simultaneously.
Klein Legal does not dispute the general applicability of Section 14 to co-counsel billing relationships. Klein Legal does dispute the procedural execution of this specific review action, which does not comply with Section 14's own notice requirement. We request a revised notice in compliance with Section 14(c), with the reclassification effective date reset to thirty days from the date of the compliant notice. In the alternative, Klein Legal requests a meeting to discuss an agreed rate adjustment that reflects the appropriate notice period and rate structure for the remainder of the Greystone engagement.
Three LP spent. Draft complete. I read it once more, looking for a sentence that sounded like fighting rather than negotiating. I found two and cut them. I sent the counter-position to Darby's finance team at 4:14 PM and copied Nesbitt as the administrative liaison of record.
Harold knocked on the door at 4:45.
"Anything I should know," he said.
"Darby's finance team reclassified our Greystone billing rate by thirty percent. I sent them a notice defect counter-position. We'll see what they come back with."
"What's our exposure if they don't reverse."
"Fifteen to twenty percent revenue hit on Greystone for the duration of the engagement." I turned the scotch glass once on the desk. "Which is why we're not accepting the full thirty."
He nodded. He went back to his office.
The reply from Darby's finance team arrived at 8:37 AM the following morning. They acknowledged the notice defect as a procedural matter. They offered to apply the reclassification with a 30-day prospective notice period, which would delay the full 30% reduction by one billing cycle. They also offered, as an alternative, an immediate 15% rate reduction in lieu of the full reclassification, in recognition of the procedural issue.
One billing cycle bought very little. Fifteen percent was half the damage.
I accepted the fifteen percent.
It was not a win. It was the difference between a bleeding wound and a wound that would close. The floor had been established. Section 14 would reclassify us again at the twelve-month confirmation window — we had eleven weeks, per Harold's note, to document the Harvey billing in a way that made the litigating-co-counsel designation unambiguous.
I sent the acceptance at 8:51 AM.
I pulled up the client board in my mind. Four names, two crossed out. Trask's card in my breast pocket. The Nesbitt back-channel producing something real at the right moment. Harold's compensation sheet folded in his drawer.
The billing war was over. The billing floor was real. Eleven weeks to document the work before the next confirmation window came around.
I picked up the phone and called Harvey's paralegal to schedule a billing documentation review meeting.
She said Mr. Specter was unavailable until Thursday.
I said Thursday was fine.
✦ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ✦
Read A LOT more chapters for free at unwrittenrealm.com
✦ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ✦
TL;DR — Patreon has the chapters ahead.
Silver / $6 / 15 or more chap ahead
Gold / $9 / 20 or more chap ahead
Platinum / $15 / 25 or more chap ahead, no weekly wait
That's it. patreon.com/fanficwriter1
If reviews aren't your thing, no pressure — they do help though.