“Fenwick & West Faces Federal Lawsuit Over Representation of FTX” —

• “Fenwick & West’s representation of defunct cryptocurrency exchange FTX continues to cause issues for the firm, which is facing a new lawsuit in federal district court in Washington, D.C., filed Wednesday by 20 plaintiffs asking for at least $525 million in compensatory damages.”
• “The suit was filed by Canadian citizen and Singapore resident Kent Byers, who is the lead plaintiff on the suit and claims he lost $2.5 million when FTX dissolved. Another Singaporean, Errol Alistair, claimed he lost $25 million to FTX. In total, the group of plaintiffs consists of 20 people from five different countries who had assets stored within FTX’s exchange before it collapsed in 2022 and ‘lost their life savings,’ according to the suit.”
• “Fenwick represented FTX and Alameda Research, the crypto trading company run by its now-imprisoned founder, fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried, for several years prior to the exchange’s demise. In addition to this suit, the firm has been caught up in a wave of multidistrict litigation brought by FTX investors since then, which was partially settled in February.”
• “The lawyers for the plaintiffs and Fenwick didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. In addition to the entire firm, the lawsuit also names Fenwick complex litigation lead partner Tyler Newby, managing partner Richard Dickson, blockchain and cryptocurrency practice lead partner Andrew Albertson, former litigation chair and managing partner Rodger Cole, antitrust partner Thomas Ensign, former cryptocurrency practice chair Daniel Friedberg and assistant general counsel Noah Rosenthal as defendants, alongside nine other John Does.”
• “Like other lawsuits filed against Fenwick for backing FTX, this one lodges the claim that Fenwick represented both FTX and Alameda Research without a conflict waiver and was aware of FTX’s misuse of customer money. In particular, the suit alleges Friedberg vouched for Bankman-Fried on firm letterhead while a partner at the firm, and noted he later left Fenwick in March 2020 to join FTX as an in-house regulatory and compliance officer, ‘carrying with him direct knowledge of the legal structures Fenwick had built for FTX.’”
• “After leaving Fenwick, Friedberg was subsequently sued by FTX in July 2023 for allegedly helping Bankman-Fried get away with fraud, in part by allegedly directing him to create a shell company called North Dimension that was receiving stolen FTX client money, an allegation this suit repeats.”
• “The lawsuit also claims Fenwick was enriched by FTX’s fraudulent behavior while it was a client, and that it did little to stop the two from being associated initially. The firm stopped representing FTX when it filed for bankruptcy. ‘The connection between Fenwick’s institutional name and FTX’s legitimacy was not incidental. It was deliberate,’ the suit read. ‘FTX insiders specifically cited ‘the great Fenwick name’ as a tool for building investor and customer confidence.’”
• “Total damages requested by the plaintiffs are roughly $525 million, in addition to attorney fees. Plaintiffs are also requesting enhanced and punitive damages against Friedberg and Newby, and that Fenwick disgorge any of the fees and compensation each of its attorneys received during the case, a number that has yet to be determined.”

“Miner Looks To DQ Dorsey Under The ‘Hot Potato’ Doctrine” —

• “A uranium mining company is looking to disqualify Dorsey & Whitney LLP as counsel for potential intervenors in a lawsuit in Colorado federal court over an arbitration initiated by another mining company based on a mineral assets purchase, saying Dorsey can’t drop it like a ‘hot potato.’”
• “According to Uranium Energy’s Jan. 30 complaint, New Mexico-headquartered Cotter had a purchase agreement and a supply agreement with Anfield and Highbury that contained arbitration provisions. Uranium Energy seeks a court declaration that it never agreed to arbitrate disputes with Cotter and that no arbitral body has jurisdiction over it regarding Cotter’s claims.”
• “Uranium Energy was never a party to these agreements, never mentioned in them and never accepted any assignment of rights, the complaint claims, yet Cotter is trying ‘to drag UEC into arbitration’ despite the fact that arbitration must be consensual.”
• “To make matters worse, the disqualification motion says, the potential Anfield intervenors now want Dorsey & Whitney to represent them even though Uranium Energy is a longstanding client of Dorsey’s. The firm has been engaged to represent Uranium Energy on U.S. tax matters since February 2012 and has billed the company for ongoing work as recently as January 2026, according to the motion.”
• “‘Dorsey’s conduct triggers the ‘hot potato’ doctrine: neither party contemplated the end of the relationship, and Dorsey’s own communications confirm that its withdrawal was motivated solely by its desire to represent Anfield,’ Uranium Energy argues.”
• “‘A law firm may not drop a client ‘like a hot potato’ to avoid the constraints of a concurrent interest,’ Uranium Energy says, pointing to a 2009 District of Colorado decision in Pamlab LLC et al. v. Hi-Tech Pharmacal Co. , concerning a lawyer who left a firm and dropped a client behind when departing.”
• “Cotter on April 29 gave the court notice that it does not oppose Anfield and Highbury’s motion to intervene. Anfield moved to intervene April 13.”