[1] THE COURT: This application is brought by the plaintiffs pursuant to Rule 26(10) for an order that the defendant Campney & Murphy produce to them copies of all documents on its list of documents. The list consists entirely of documents listed as privileged in Part III.
[2] Campney & Murphy is a firm of solicitors. The plaintiffs allege that some of the other defendants in this action transferred funds (and perhaps other assets) legitimately belonging to the plaintiffs to that firm. They allege that the firm knew or ought to have known of the plaintiffs' interests in the funds, and allege that the firm therefore held the funds legitimately belonging to the plaintiffs in a constructive trust.
courts.gov.bc.ca
Campney & Murphy law firm comes to an end
About 40 lawyers will be looking for new practices when company folds
David Baines
Vancouver Sun
Friday, July 04, 2003
Mark Van Manen, Vancouver Sun / Campney & Murphy announced Thursday it will close on Aug 31. In its heyday in the late 1980s, the law firm had about 85 lawyers.
Campney & Murphy, one of Vancouver's oldest and most venerable law firms, has announced it is closing its doors after 71 years in business.
Managing partner Tim Nichols said the firm will conclude its practice on Aug. 31 and the firm's remaining 40 lawyers, along with about 60 ancillary staff, will disperse to other firms or set up their own practices.
He said the decision to close the firm was made at the end of last week, and formally announced to staff late Wednesday.
"It was a very sad day and we tried to express our heartfelt regret that this has come to pass," he said.
But he said the closure shouldn't come as a surprise to the firm's employees: "There has been quite a bit of speculation about our situation, lots of rumours floating around. The staff had seen some people depart from the firm and they recognize we have a number of empty offices. I'd be surprised if it came as a big shock to any of them."
Former partner Murray Clemens, who worked at Campney & Murphy from 1980 to 1999 before leaving for Nathanson Schachter & Thompson, said the firm was a "tremendous place" to work.
"It created a lot of opportunities for a lot of people. Some of the leading practitioners in Canada got their start there. I have really warm and happy thoughts of that place, what it provided for me and others. It was a venerable firm and it's a bleeding shame it has all come to an end."
Nichols said that as a mid-sized regional firm, Campney & Murphy was not large enough to compete with large national firms, but as a full-service firm it was forced to incur significant overhead expenses which it found difficult to absorb.
He also acknowledged there was internal dissension: "That's probably a reasonable comment, but I'm not going to comment on that in specific terms. You can infer from the result we have experienced some inability to agree among the remaining partners, but I don't think that's particularly unusual."
At one time, Campney and Murphy had a gold-plated client list that included the Bank of Montreal, Canadian Helicopter, Alcan, Vancouver Wharves, most of the school districts in the province, and 18 of the 23 worldwide protection and indemnity associations (which insure deep-sea carriers).
The firm reached its zenith in the late 1980s. It had about 85 lawyers, hired 12 articling students every year and kept half of them. It provided junior lawyers with tremendous exposure and experience.
Then in 1991, there was a significant defection. Eric Harris, who headed the labour group, left with 10 or 11 other lawyers to set up their own firm, Harris & Company.
The separation, said one former partner, "was negotiated in absolute good faith and friendship. They had a specialized practice, different interest and outlooks. We were able to separate right down to the art work."
During the late 1990s, the number of defections began to accelerate. They included Doug Garrod, a securities lawyer who left in 1997 to become president of Global Securities in Vancouver; Bob Breivik, who left in 1998 to join securities lawyer Mark Skwarok, creating Breivik & Skwarok; and Clemens, who left in 1999 to join Nathanson Schachter & Thompson.
Those individual departures soon escalated into group defections. In 2000, estate law specialists Lynn Waterman and Elaine Reynolds left the firm along with James Shumka, a tax planning lawyer who was closely associated with that group.
But the most dramatic and contentious defections involved Peter Bernard and five associates -- Gary Wharton, Tom Hawkins, Peter Swanson, Nevin Fishman and Mark Hilton -- who constituted Campney & Murphy's entire maritime law group. They left in 2002 to form their own company, Bernard & Company.
In 2000, the firm began talking about a possible merger with Toronto-based Miller Thompson, but nothing materialized.
Meanwhile, it was becoming obvious that Campney & Murphy had serious internal problems.
According to former partners, one problem was the absence of a management group strong enough to ensure that the interests of the client, rather than the firm, was given priority. For example, files stayed with the lawyer who brought them in, rather than being transferred to the lawyers who could best look after them.
There was also competition between groups for business. To the dismay of some members of the firm, the winner was the securities group, led by Paul MacNeill, who emerged as a dominant force and served as chairman of the firm's executive committee from 1997 to 2002.
MacNeill's clients included some dubious junior companies, including Harvard Technologies, which was developing what it claimed would be the world's finest french-fry vending machine, and Unique Broadband Systems, a high-tech company whose share price soared then collapsed in 2000 and 2001.
MacNeill became intimately involved with many of these companies as the firm's legal counsel and as a director. In many cases, he was granted options, enabling him to reap millions of dollars of profits from companies that were commercial failures.
This generated negative publicity for the firm, and raised questions as to whether the proceeds should accrue to MacNeill of the firm.
But in the end, MacNeill went the same route as many of his partners. In November, he resigned from the firm, but still maintains an office there, at least until Aug. 31.
dbaines@png.canwest.com
canada.com |
