Caperton Saga Leaves 15-Year Imprint on Reed Smith Duo

, The Legal Intelligencer


Fawcett had a similar take.

"I think it means that we continue to have a chance of achieving justice which was the goal from the start," Fawcett said of the Virginia ruling. "That's a great thing. Of course there's frustration that things got off track, but it's a lot better than the alternative."

The Toll of Justice

As Stanley and Fawcett gear up for another trial, which they are hoping for by year's end, Reed Smith hasn't batted a proverbial eye.

Both Buchanan Ingersoll, which had the case until Fawcett was forced to take it to Reed Smith when a conflict arose in 2010, and Reed Smith have invested significant amounts of time and money on the contingency-fee case without being paid a dime.

Both firms will only be reimbursed if a verdict comes down in Caperton's favor.

When the Virginia court ruling came down, Leamer wrote that Reed Smith had spent more than $6 million on the case. Stanley said he wasn't sure whether it was that high, though he said it would definitely be over $4 million.

"I quit having [anyone] print off bill sets a long time ago," Stanley said.

Both Stanley and Fawcett said that, at least as far as they were aware, no one at Reed Smith or Buchanan Ingersoll had complained of the firms' investment into these cases.

"Both firms were run by people who really consistently said 'hey, we have an injustice here,'" Fawcett said. "I needed that. I needed good backing. Both firms are in the business of making money. When it came down to it and they saw what was going on in West Virginia, both [firms] had leaders that were going to fight this."

The true cost of the cases on Stanley and Fawcett professionally and personally is hard to calculate.

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202598736810

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.