In the antitrust class action matter which accuses a number of railroad companies conspiring to inflate fuel surcharges and impose the same on customers, Latham & Watkins is defending the Union Pacific Railroad Company. However, a former client, Oxbow Carbon & Minerals LLC, and related entities which have been clients of Latham have argued that Latham’s representation of Union Pacific exhibits “a classic conflict of interest situation.” Oxbow has also filed its separate antitrust suit against Union Pacific over same or similar issues.
In court documents, Oxbow has alleged that as a former law firm employed by the company, Latham was in possession of “relevant confidential business information” that could allow it to “implicate issues and strategies,” while defending Union Pacific and representing the defendant in a case where Oxbow was the plaintiff. Oxbow has alleged that Latham’s involvement is “directly adverse to Oxbow and its interests in the matter.”
In March, Latham contested the charge of conflict of interest and has submitted that its representation of Union Pacific did not raise any relevant issues because Oxbow is pursuing its case separate from the class action, and that Latham is representing Union Pacific in the class action matter.
In its brief, Latham observed, “Oxbow obviously desires to punish Latham for perceived disloyalty … Oxbow’s remedy is the one it has already exercised – to terminate Latham and hire counsel.”
Latham also mentioned that the law firm had turned down an opportunity to defend Union Pacific in the separate antitrust action Oxbow has brought against the railways company. However, in the class action, Oxbow was not a named plaintiff, and the law firm was under no obligation to seek a waiver from Oxbow, in order to represent Union Pacific.
