4 unchanged sentences
Scherer, Adam W.
−Removed: Verost (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”) and Ducera Partners LLC (together with the Individual Defendants, “Defendants”) in New York Supreme Court, Commercial Division (the “Court”).
+Added: Verost (collectively, the “Individual Defendants”) and Ducera Partners LLC (together with the Individual Defendants, the “Defendants”) in New York Supreme Court, Commercial Division (the “Court”).
The complaint alleges that the Individual Defendants, three former partners and one former employee of the PWP Plaintiffs, entered into a scheme while at PWP to lift out the PWP Plaintiffs’ restructuring group to form a new competing firm that they were secretly forming in breach of their contractual and fiduciary duties to the PWP Plaintiffs.
The complaint contains 14 causes of action, and seeks declaratory relief as well as damages resulting from the Individual Defendants’ contractual and fiduciary breaches and from Defendants’ unfair competition and tortious interference with the PWP Plaintiffs’ contracts and client relationships.
−Removed: On November 9, 2015, Defendants filed an Answer, Counterclaims, Cross-claims and a Third-Party Complaint, which contained 14 causes of action.
−Removed: On July 17, 2016, the Court issued a decision, dismissing half of Defendants’ claims with prejudice.
−Removed: On August 18, 2016, Defendants filed an Amended Answer, Counterclaims, Cross-claims and Third-Party Complaint, with seven counterclaims and cross-claims.
−Removed: On December 12, 2016, Defendants appealed the dismissal of three of their counterclaims and cross-claims to the New York Appellate Division, First Department (the “First Department”).
−Removed: On August 29, 2017, the First Department issued a decision denying Defendants’ appeal other than allowing one Defendant to proceed with his breach of fiduciary duty counterclaim.
−Removed: On October 27, 2017, Defendants moved the First Department for leave to appeal its decision to the New York Court of Appeals.
−Removed: On December 28, 2017, the First Department denied Defendants’ motion for leave.
−Removed: On April 24, 2018, Defendants filed a Second Amended Answer, Counterclaims, Cross-claims and Third-Party Complaint, with eight counterclaims and cross-claims.
+Added: On November 9, 2015, the Defendants filed an Answer, Counterclaims, Cross-claims and a Third-Party Complaint, which contained 14 causes of action.
+Added: On July 17, 2016, the Court issued a decision, dismissing half of the Defendants’ -claims with prejudice.
+Added: On August 18, 2016, the Defendants filed an Amended Answer, Counterclaims, Cross-claims and Third-Party Complaint, with seven counterclaims and cross-claims to the New York Appellate Division, First Department (the “First Department”).
+Added: On August 29, 2017, the First Department issued a decision denying the Defendants’ appeal other than allowing one Defendant to proceed with his breach of fiduciary duty counterclaim.
+Added: On October 27, 2017, the Defendants moved the First Department for leave to appeal its decision to the New York Court of Appeals.
+Added: On December 28, 2017, the First Department denied the Defendants’ motion for leave.
+Added: On April 24, 2018, the Defendants filed a Second Amended Answer, Counterclaims, Cross-claims and Third-Party Complaint, which contains eight counterclaims and cross-claims.
Defendants are seeking declaratory relief and damages of no less than $60.0 million, as well as statutory interest.
1 unchanged sentence
On June 30, 2023, the Court issued a decision denying Defendants’ motion for leave.
−Removed: On January 29, 2024, Defendants filed an opening brief in the First Department appealing the June 30, 2023 decision denying their motion for leave.
−Removed: After the completion of discovery, both the PWP Plaintiffs and Defendants subsequently moved for summary judgment.
−Removed: On March 20, 2020, the parties completed briefing of their respective motions.
−Removed: The Court held oral argument on the motions on May 27, 2021.
−Removed: On May 24, 2023, the Court issued a decision and order on both motions for summary judgment (the “Summary Judgment Decision”).
+Added: On January 29, 2024, Defendants appealed to the First Department the June 30, 2023 decision denying their motion for leave.
+Added: On April 16, 2024, the First Department denied Defendants’ appeal.
+Added: After the completion of discovery, both the PWP Plaintiffs and the Defendants subsequently moved for summary judgment.
+Added: On March 20, 2020 the parties completed briefing of their respective motions (the “Summary Judgment Decision”).
The Court granted the PWP Plaintiffs motion with respect to the restrictive covenants in the PWP Plaintiffs’ agreements, finding that they are valid and enforceable, and otherwise denied the motion.
The Court denied Defendants’ motion in its entirety.
−Removed: On July 25, 2023, Defendants filed a notice of appeal of the Summary Judgment Decision.
−Removed: The Court has set trial for April 29, 2024 through May 21, 2024.
−Removed: A final pre-trial conference has been set for April 24, 2024.
+Added: On July 25, 2023, Defendants appealed parts of the Summary Judgment Decision.
+Added: On August 30, 2024, the First Department issued a decision granting in part and denying in part Defendants’ appeal.
+Added: The First Department granted Defendants’ appeal only to the extent it found that the PWP Plaintiffs could not pursue a client solicitation claim against two specific clients.
+Added: The First Department denied Defendants’ appeal to the extent it found that the PWP Plaintiffs’ restrictive covenants were reasonable and enforceable, and Defendants’ counterclaim for deferred compensation needed to be decided at trial.
+Added: Trial started on January 24, 2025 and is scheduled to end on March 7, 2025.
We believe that our 14 causes of action are meritorious.
5 unchanged sentences
Some of these matters may involve claims of substantial amounts.
+Added: For details on the current legal proceedings, refer to Note 16—Commitments and Contingencies in the notes to the consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
Mine Safety Disclosures
1 unchanged sentence
Compared sentence by sentence after normalising whitespace, quotation marks, case and digits, so re-formatting and restated figures do not read as changed language. Wording changes appear as one removal and one addition. The current filing and the prior one are authoritative.