Austin American-Statesman Reports on Settlement in Hydro-Quebec Battery Dispute
October 11, 2008 — In an article titled “Battery Deal Gives UT Royalty Payments,” The Austin American-Statesman reports that The University of Texas and Bickel & Brewer client Hydro-Quebec have "settled a 7-year-old lawsuit that clears the way for the development and sale of battery-powered products that would use technology created at the Austin campus."
The report states that, according to the terms of the settlement, the UT System and Hydro-Quebec will be paid $30 million by Japanese communications giant NTT Corp.
The report states that "NTT Corp. will license the battery technology patents to Hydro-Quebec and the university system, giving H-Q free rein to try to sell the technology in a range of electronic devices. The settlement also allows the utility to sublicense the technology to other companies."
Vanity Fair: Oil in the Family
June 2008 – A profile story in Vanity Fair, “Oil in the Family,” profiles the story of the Hunt dynasty and legal actions dividing the family. The publication writes, “In 1935 oil tycoon H.L. Hunt, known as the richest man in America, created what would become a multi-billion-dollar trust for his descendants. Three generations later, a lawsuit by his free-spending grandson is shaking the foundations of that mighty family fortune.”
“At stake, according to family documents, is an oil-and-gas fortune worth between $2.5 and $4 billion,” according to the article.”
Bill Brewer, who represents Al Hill III, and his client “both maintain that the exchange of charges and countercharges between the warring camps has obscured the core issue: the family’s plan to sell Hunt Petroleum and to break no just one but two trusts that own the company, and then to seize the proceeds, much sooner than the family ever would have been able to had the trusts remained intact,” writes author Alan Peppard.
Read the article here (subscription required).
Hospitality Law Reports on Firm Client's $10.3M Trial Award
April 2008 — Hospitality Law reports that the "Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co. was slapped with a $10 million verdict after a District Court jury found the hotel violated its fiduciary duties to an Indonesian property owner" — firm client Karang Mas Sejahtera (KMS).
The article, "Jury Awards Bali Hotel Operator $10.3 Million Verdict," states that the jury in the Greenbelt, Maryland, case found that the Ritz violated its operating agreement with KMS by opening a competing luxury property within three miles of KMS's property, the Ritz-Carlton Bali Resort & Spa.
According to the report, Bill Brewer, counsel to KMS and a partner at Bickel & Brewer, told Hospitality Law that the case "clarifies the rights, responsibilities and obligations of all parties involved in a hotel management agreement and affirmed that his client's position that the Ritz-Carlton breached its fiduciary duty from a financial, operational and competitive point of view."
"It doesn't matter what you call a relationship — if someone is managing your business, your assets, for your benefit and being paid handsomely to do that, they owe you a fiduciary duty," Brewer said. "The Ritz-Carlton attempted to claim that they and their subsidiary didn't have a fiduciary responsibility to the owner [of the Bali property], and the jury absolutely decided otherwise. I think it reminded everybody that between a principal and an agent, honesty and fact are the touchstone of the relationship."
Jury Awards Bali Hotel Operator $10.3 Million Verdict
April 2008 – Hospitality Law reported on the firm’s trial win against the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co. on behalf of client Karang Mas Sejahtera (KMS), owner of the Ritz-Carlton Bali Resort & Spa. The jury awarded KMS more than $10 million.
As reported, “KMS filed the lawsuit against Ritz-Carlton three years ago, when the company began developing the Bulgari Bali Hotel. KMS accused the Ritz of violating its fiduciary duties by operating a competing property in disregard to KMS’s territorial rights and alleged that the Ritz failed to recognize its responsibilities as an agent of the Ritz-Carlton Bali.”
A Greenbelt, Maryland jury found the Ritz breached its amended and restated operating agreement and violated its fiduciary duties to KMS, among other things.
“It doesn’t matter what you call a relationship – if someone is managing your business, your assets, for your benefit and being paid handsomely to do that, they owe you a fiduciary duty,” said firm partner William A. Brewer III. “I think it [the jury verdict] reminded everybody that between a principal and an agent, honest and fact are the touchstone of the relationship.”
D Magazine: Hunt vs. Hunt
March 2008 – D Magazine profiles “the fight inside Dallas’ wealthiest family” in a cover article that chronicles the legal pursuit of Brewer client Al Hill III.
The magazine writes, “Without Al Hill III’s transformation, he might not have had the courage later in life to follow his convictions. Even when it meant accusing his own family of tax evasion and fraud.”
Read the article by clicking here.
Dallas Morning News: A Matter of Trust
February 10, 2008 – The Dallas Morning News takes an in-depth look at a family dispute over “two trusts, belonging to Margaret [Hunt Hill] and her late brother Hassie, with an estimated worth of $2 billion to $4 billion.”
As reported, legal actions have “brought the lights up on a sideshow of two so-called magicians – Tom Hunt, the low-key, low-profile trustee of both trusts and Bill Brewer, Al Hill III’s flashy bulldog of a lawyer.”
As reported, “William A. Brewer III has built his legal reputation with scorched-earth tactics that have made him sought after and scorned by Dallas’ rich and famous.”
Read the article “Hunt heirs locked in bitter fight over who should have hands on funds' fortunes,” by clicking here.
Ten Million Dollar Jury Verdict Announced Against The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company
February 4, 2008 — One of the hospitality industry's most closely-watched trials has ended in victory for a hotel owner against The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, LLC ("Ritz-Carlton"). Bickel & Brewer law firm has announced that its client, Karang Mas Sejahtera ("KMS"), owner of the exclusive Ritz-Carlton Bali Resort & Spa ("Ritz-Carlton Bali"), prevailed in a case that may have wide-ranging implications on the manner in which hotel management agreements are interpreted -- and enforced.
On January 25, following a three-week trial, a nine-person jury in the United States District Court in Greenbelt, Maryland, reached a unanimous decision that Ritz-Carlton violated its fiduciary duties to KMS and the Ritz-Carlton Bali. The jury awarded KMS $382,000 in actual damages and $10 million in punitive damages -- $5 million more than KMS had requested. The landmark verdict also allows KMS to pursue millions more in attorneys' fees.
"The jury's decision affirms our client's position — that Ritz-Carlton breached its fiduciary duty from a financial, operational and competitive point of view," says William A. Brewer III, partner at Bickel & Brewer and counsel for KMS. "This case is of vital importance to the hospitality industry, as it further underscores and clarifies the rights, responsibilities and obligations of all parties involved in a hotel management agreement.”
Filed more than three years ago, this lawsuit has become one of the nation’s most high-profile disputes between a hotel management company and individual hotel owner. The case centers around the development and opening of the Bulgari Bali Hotel, which began operation in September 2006, just three miles from the KMS property. KMS demonstrated that Ritz-Carlton violated its fiduciary duties by operating that competing property in disregard of KMS’ territorial rights and failing to recognize its responsibilities as an agent of the Ritz-Carlton Bali. The Bulgari Bali, which is managed by Ritz-Carlton, is the first resort in the upstart Bulgari Hotels & Resorts chain, a joint venture between Marriott International (Ritz-Carlton’s parent company) and high-fashion Italian jeweler Bulgari SpA.
The Bulgari Bali Hotel opened under Ritz-Carlton management despite concerns from KMS that the luxury hotel would violate the territorial exclusivity provision KMS held with Ritz-Carlton. Among several other claims, KMS alleged that the Bulgari property was benefiting from the use of the Ritz-Carlton brand name in its marketing and promotion — all in direct violation of the operating agreement between the KMS and Ritz-Carlton.
“At the end of the day, we proved that our client suffered a material breach of loyalty,” says James S. Renard, partner at Bickel & Brewer who joined Brewer as counsel for KMS. “We alleged — and the jury emphatically agreed — that Ritz-Carlton was bound by a contractual obligation not to use the Ritz-Carlton name and brand to operate another hotel on the Indonesian Island of Bali without our client’s consent.”
Brewer says this jury verdict may be a seminal moment for the hospitality industry. His law firm has been involved in many of them over the past several decades, representing a wide range of internationally-known hotel franchisors, management companies, owners, developers and investors. As an example, Bickel & Brewer successfully argued Woolley v. Embassy Suites, Inc., the case in which the court held that hotel management agreements are agency agreements and, as such, are always terminable at the option of the owner. In 1999, Bickel & Brewer extended Woolley by establishing that a franchise agreement may also create an agency relationship between the franchisor and the hotel owner.
“This case is like the Woolley cases in that it has the potential to change the industry’s legal landscape,” Renard says. “This jury verdict compels the industry to look more closely at management agreements — and evaluate the manner in which they are interpreted by all involved parties.”
Victory for Starwood Hotels & Resorts in Multi-Million Dollar Dispute
January 1, 2008 – American Lawyer Media profiled firm Partner William A. Brewer III and the firm’s successful defense of Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. against claims relating to its ownership and management of two Westin hotels, one in Chicago and the other in San Franscisco.
As explained in the article, “Victory for Starwood Hotels & Resorts in Multi-Million Dollar Dispute,” $200 million was at stake but also something even bigger – failure could result in “scores of other hotel owners who might join together to file a class action on a similar claim…”
According to the article, “After a 17-month arbitration process and a two-week trial, Starwood in 2006 soundly defeated its opponent on every claim. The victory reaffirmed [the firms’] position as one of the leading hospitality litigation firms in the world. Because of the potential for other lawsuits should the company settle or lose, the case was a quintessential ‘bet-the-company’ lawsuit,” Brewer said.