The Ninth Circuit today asks the Supreme Court to answer this question: “Under California law, does a dissolved law firm have a property interest in legal matters
that are in progress but not completed at the time the law firm is dissolved, when the dissolved law firm had been retained to handle the matters on an hourly basis?” The answer is relevant to the case — In the Matter of Heller Ehrman LLP — because, the federal court says, it will help determine whether there has been a fraudulent transfer under the Bankruptcy Code.
The question comes just a few weeks after the Second Circuit asked for help on an insurance law issue (the Supreme Court has yet to docket the Second Circuit’s request) and the Ninth Circuit indicated it would be sending its own California insurance question to the court.
Before these recent actual or probable requests, it had been almost a year since a court had asked the Supreme Court to answer a state law question.
[July 28 update: the Supreme Court docketed the Ninth Circuit’s request today. The court is titling the case, Heller Ehrman LLP v. Davis Wright Tremaine LLP.]