The law firm famous for taking on corporate giants now finds itself defending its own name. Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, a powerhouse in class-action litigation, is fighting sanctions on two fronts — one in Seattle tied to a lawsuit against Apple and Amazon, and another in Philadelphia stemming from long-running thalidomide claims.
In Seattle, U.S. District Judge Kymberly Evanson accused the firm of misleading both the court and the defendants about the status of a plaintiff who had quietly sought to withdraw from the case. The lawsuit, which claimed Apple and Amazon conspired to inflate prices of iPhones and iPads, collapsed after the revelation. The court has already ordered Hagens Berman to pay more than $223,000 in legal fees to the tech companies, and another fee petition is on the horizon.
The firm insists it acted within ethical boundaries, arguing that attorney-client confidentiality prevented earlier disclosure. In a filing, Hagens Berman acknowledged hindsight might suggest different choices but maintained its lawyers acted “with mindful observance of their ethical obligations.” Managing partner Steve Berman said the firm has now backed its defense with expert declarations challenging the court’s decision.
While that storm brews in the Pacific Northwest, a darker cloud lingers over Philadelphia. For more than a decade, Hagens Berman has faced accusations of misconduct in its handling of thalidomide birth defect lawsuits — a series of cases once aimed at holding major drugmakers accountable. The firm settled claims against GSK in 2014, a deal that a federal judge later said appeared to favor the lawyers over their clients.
Sanctions soon followed. Judge Paul Diamond previously rebuked the firm for what he described as “bad-faith advocacy,” saying it pursued time-barred and baseless claims. A special master later accused one of the firm’s lawyers of altering an expert’s report to push a client to drop her case — a claim the firm vehemently denies, calling the findings “baseless” and “beyond the master’s authority.”
Despite Diamond upholding the report earlier this year, he has yet to rule on fresh sanctions. Hagens Berman has since filed to have the judge removed from further proceedings, alleging an “appearance of bias” due to his communications with the special master.
Berman stands by his firm’s record, arguing that losing a case is not the same as committing misconduct. “Personal injury cases are lost every day on causation,” he said. “That does not mean they were brought in bad faith.”
Elsewhere in the legal world, other heavyweight courtroom dramas continue to unfold. JPMorgan Chase is battling to stop further legal fee payments to convicted entrepreneur Charlie Javice, claiming she’s burned through an “excessive” $115 million in defense costs. Meanwhile, Google has agreed to pay nearly $190 million in fees to private lawyers representing Texas in a massive privacy settlement, part of a growing trend of states partnering with outside firms for big-ticket litigation.
For Hagens Berman, however, the stakes are personal. The firm that made its name fighting the world’s biggest corporations now faces a fight of its own — one that could shape how it’s remembered in the courtroom battles to come.
