Mr. Barnes appears to shrug off the ethical problem here as if it were no big deal.

It is a big deal.

The associate was correct — the firm should not have been billing for unnecessary work if the claim was groundless because the plaintiff blew the statute. Unless the partners had specifically discussed this with the client, and the client (who would have to be brain-dead) expressly approved the research after being told the claim was worthless, they were committing malpractice and fraud.

The associate could have and should have gone to his firm’s managing partner, the client, and the attorney disciplinary body — in that order — if his valid complaint was not addressed.

The incident Mr. Barnes cites is, albeit unintentionally, a perfect illustration of why Biglaw as it is currently practiced will soon become extinct.

And no one will shed a tear.