HOUSTON - A law firm accused of unfairly canceling a partnership with others to pursue lawsuits over a 1983 bombing in Beirut is asking a federal judge to grant it summary judgment.
Fay Law Group filed its motion Nov. 15 in Houston federal court in the lawsuit brought by Roy & Gabel, its once-partners who sued it in August 2023 for tortious interference with a contract.
The two firms had agreed to a joint representation to file cases for U.S. Marines and family members over the bombing of barracks in the Lebanon city. Roy & Gabel claimed they were first retained by the clients and then agreed to a joint venture with Fay Law Group.
Roy & Gabel says in September 2022, Fay Law attempted to "cut" it out of the lawsuits by telling clients Roy & Gabel had been fired.
Fay Law's motion says it can't be sued for tortious interference with a contract to which it is a party and that a second agreement between the firms supersedes the first.
"If Plaintiffs' claim for tortious interference with contract is predicated on old retention letters Roy and Gabel signed with clients before entering the later-signed Joint Retention Agreements, whether the claim fails as a matter of law because the Joint Resolution Agreements, which provided materially different terms than the old retention letters, superseded the prior letters," the motion says.
By 2017, Roy and Gabel had signed more than 200 clients, then contacted Fay Law Group for help pursuing them. Fay Law had signed about 250 clients.
In 2019, Fay Law filed suit over the bombing in D.C. federal court. But the firm says Roy and Gabel failed to perform their duties under the contract.
Both were to obtain client affidavits and take client depositions to determine if they were entitled to damages - and how much that would be - under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act.
One lawyer assisting Fay Law Group described Roy and Gabel's failure to take depositions as a "liability." Another used the acronym "FUBAR" to describe Roy and Gabel's cases.
"For years, Fay Law Group received countless phone calls and emails from clients, complaining that they were unable to contact Roy and Gabel," the motion says. "Roy and Gabel also stopped responding to Fay Law Group's calls and messages, without explanation."
The motion says Roy and Gabel was dissolved after it failed to pay franchise taxes. The two name partners opened their own new firms.
Lastly, Fay Law says it incurred more than $500,000 in fees and costs, with Roy and Gabel not paying its share.