Law firm says it has lost touch with hundreds of clients suing over L.A. County landfill
Downtown LA Law Group, a law firm facing multiple state and local investigations, says they plan to bow out of a high-stakes environmental case against the county’s second-largest landfill within the next two months.
Andrew Morrow, an attorney spearheading the litigation for the firm, said in court Thursday that the group has passed off about 500 of its 1,200 landfill clients to another personal injury firm. Roughly 500 more clients, he said, could not be reached and will likely be dismissed from the case.
“We have sort of exhausted our ability to communicate with most of these people,” Morrow told Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong.
A spokesperson for the firm did not respond to questions from The Times into what precipitated them losing touch with roughly 40% of their clients in the litigation against Chiquita Canyon landfill, which has been accused of allowing toxic fumes to waft into nearby homes.
The hearing comes as Downtown LA Law Group, or DTLA, faces allegations of attorney misconduct in two significant cases moving through California courts.
The Times reported this fall that nine of the firm’s clients in a sex abuse settlement said they had been paid to sue — and in some cases make up their claims — to become part of a historic $4 billion payout.
This month, The Times reported that an actor said he’d been sent to the area around the Chiquita Canyon landfill to recruit clients for the firm. Some residents told The Times they’d been signed up for lawsuits without their consent.
California bans non-attorneys from directly soliciting or procuring clients to sign up for lawsuits. The practice, known as capping, was outlawed over concerns it allows law firms to exploit victims in pursuit of hefty payouts.
“All of the allegations, if accurate, show patently improper conduct by lawyers that calls into question the representation of thousands of Plaintiffs in this case,” Paul Chan, an attorney representing the landfill, wrote in a July 24 motion.
DTLA has denied all wrongdoing and previously said the claims of attorney misconduct come from “a competing law firm attempting to use the press and the State Bar to eliminate competition in the same litigation.”
Morrow told the judge Thursday he didn’t believe his clients’ cases should be scrutinized solely because of the allegations dogging his firm.
“Singling them out for something they had nothing to do with — alleged misconduct on the part of my firm or recruiters — is I think just patently unfair,” he said.
Attorneys for the landfill say they want more information on how the residents represented by DTLA joined the case. They have requested a judge’s permission to conduct extra vetting on DTLA clients and serve subpoenas on the alleged recruiter as well as a partner at the firm.
“Major issues of unlawful conduct in this case have been repeatedly raised and explored by California’s largest newspaper,” Chan wrote. “They must be explored through discovery to protect the integrity of these proceedings.”
Frimpong appeared unconvinced that small bits of cash, which some residents said they received in exchange to sue, were enough to warrant a special vetting process for DTLA clients. Lawsuits always have a financial incentive, she argued, and it’s the defense’s job to treat all the claims with a healthy amount of skepticism.
“Why would that be the case that someone who got a gift card is more likely to falsify than someone who thinks I’m going to get $6,000 at the end of this?” she said.