Mediated a dispute between internet advertising company and company that provided advertising space on its sites as well as technology for real-time bidding for placement of ads on sites that were accessed or clicked. Defendant became suspicious at the tremendous volume of traffic that was generated and claimed much of that traffic (clicks) was fraudulent. Defendant refused to pay several hundred thousand dollars in revenue. The parties cross-complained.
Plaintiff agreed to price protect $30 million of DRAM computer memory components that defendant purchased for redistribution. Under the deal, defendant agreed to stock huge quantities of plaintiff’s hard-to-sell computer memory products in exchange for a commitment to keep lowering prices on the product as the market fell. As the bottom fell out of the DRAM market, defendant claimed that plaintiff did not honor this agreement and refused to adjust prices to meet market conditions. Plaintiff sued defendant for millions that plaintiff claimed was owed to it for unpaid invoices. Defendant then cross-complained for breach of the price protection agreement.
Former partner in a law firm sued for breach of partnership dissolution agreement and sought to recover his share of an $88 million fee awarded on a contingency case following dissolution of the partnership.
City sued a supplier of computer technology for participation in a scheme with corrupt city employees. City alleged that defendants submitted falsified claims for payment of computer equipment and services and paid kickbacks to city employees. Defendants cross-complained for breach of written contract and for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing alleging that the City had barred them from doing business with the City unlawfully and without due process.