Business Tort Cases

Business Tort Case/Sale Of A Foreign Subsidiary

Tom Comerford was lead counsel for a fortune 100 Company which was involved in a dispute concerning the sale of its foreign subsidiary. The company sought out Tom Comerford because it realized it needed a plaintiff's lawyer to handle the case. The company had sold its foreign subsidiary subject to a "post-closing audit." The auditors proposed an adjustment of approximately $55 million of the $57 million sales price for the subsidiary. Tom lined up a strong assembly of accounting, economic and foreign currency experts. After securing a preliminary injunction to prevent the issuance of the accounting opinion, Tom's legal team was able to bring the case to a successful conclusion-saving the client over $50,000,000. The parties settling the case insisted upon anonymity.

Business Tort Case/Improper Transactions

In 2006, Comerford, Chilson, & Moser recovered $2.5 million on behalf of a North Carolina textile company that was bankrupted due to the alleged tortious conduct of the company's former officers and directors, as well as two defendant companies. The suit arose out of two allegedly fraudulent and otherwise improper transactions. The first concerns a Management Agreement passed by the Board of Directors which required the textile company to pay well over $100,000 per month for management services to Defendant Company A, which already controlled the textile company, for services that were already being provided. The second transaction at issue concerned the sale of a company owned by the textile company to Defendant Company B which was created and controlled by Defendant Company A, which already controlled the textile company. Further, Company B failed to pay on the note issued to the textile company for the purchase.

Business Tort Case/Defrauded Insurance Company

In 2004, Comerford, Chilson, & Moser recovered over $2.93 million on behalf of an insurance company that was defrauded by a reinsurance company and its principal shareholders. The insurance company contended that the reinsurance company caused the insurance pool that it administered to transfer hundreds of millions of dollars to the reinsurance company and its shareholders (namely the two individuals referred to herein and interests controlled by them) in the form of illegitimate profit commissions in turn paid out as dividends, as well as other improper payments. The insurance company was a member of the pool, along with several other companies. The matter settled pre-suit.