Arbitral Digest

Matter

Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered v. Pavich Law Group, P.C., et al. (District of Columbia Court of Appeals Nos. 25-CV-0086 & 25-CV-0229)

Arbitration over four law firms’ contingency-fee allocation in Wye Oak’s Iraq litigation, with D.C. court review of the fee agreement, award, and related claims.

  • International commercial arbitration
  • Cross-border litigation
  • Recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards
  • Setting aside arbitral awards
  • Jurisdiction and arbitration agreements
Industry type
Professional, scientific and technical activities
Applicable rules
JAMS Streamlined Arbitration Rules and Procedures

Procedural record

  1. 12 August 2021Arbitration

    12 August 2021Arbitration

    Interim Arbitration Award

    JAMS

    Decision summary
    The interim award allocated Wye Oak’s contingency fee among the law firms as follows: Pavich Law Group, 18 percent; Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, 27.5 percent; Kalbian Hagerty, 0.5 percent; and Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola, 0 percent.

    Participants

    Pavich Law Group
    Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP
    Kalbian Hagerty, LLP
    Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered
    JAMS
    Arbitrator
    Richard A. Levie

    5 years and 22 days later · 1848 days

  2. 3 September 2026United States

    3 September 2026United States

    Amended Opinion of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals in Nos. 25-CV-0086 & 25-CV-0229 dated 3 September 2026

    District of Columbia Court of Appeals

    Case no.
    Nos. 25-CV-0086 & 25-CV-0229
    Decision summary
    The court affirmed the Superior Court’s judgment confirming the arbitrator’s final award and denying Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered’s motion to vacate. It held that the ACAF was not procured by fraudulent inducement or duress, that the arbitration clause covered the fee-allocation dispute and related tort claims, and that vacatur of the underlying Iraq Litigation judgment did not render the ACAF void.

    Participants

    Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered
    Representative
    Robert N. Kelly (For: Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered)
    Representative
    Tara A. Barnes (For: Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered)
    Pavich Law Group, P.C.
    Representative
    Stuart A. Berman (For: Pavich Law Group, P.C.)
    Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP
    Representative
    Eric C. Rowe (For: Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP)
    Representative
    C. Allen Foster (For: Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP)
    Representative
    Masten Childers, III (For: Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP)
    Kalbian Hagerty, LLP
    Representative
    William P. McGrath, Jr. (For: Kalbian Hagerty, LLP)
    Wye Oak Technology, Inc.
    Representative
    Joe R. Reeder (For: Wye Oak Technology, Inc.)
    District of Columbia Court of Appeals
    Judge
    Blackburne-Rigsby
    Judge
    Easterly
    Judge
    Shanker

    Authorities cited

    23
    • Revised Uniform Arbitration Act (D.C. Code § 16-4423)
      statute
    • Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. § 10)
      statute
    • Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered v. PLG Law Group, P.C. (309 A.3d 587 (D.C. 2024))
      case
    • Wye Oak Technology, Inc. v. Republic of Iraq (109 F.4th 509 (D.C. Cir. 2024))
      case
    • Wye Oak Technology, Inc. v. Republic of Iraq (146 S. Ct. 396 (2025))
      case
    • C.R. Calderon Construction, Inc. v. Grunley Construction Co., Inc. (257 A.3d 1046 (D.C. 2021))
      case
    • Celtech, Inc. v. Broumand (584 A.2d 1257 (D.C. 1991))
      case
    • Zegeye v. Liss (70 A.3d 1208 (D.C. 2013))
      case
    • DCA Capitol Hill LTAC, LLC v. Capitol Hill Group (332 A.3d 518 (D.C. 2025))
      case
    • Hercules & Co., Ltd. v. Shama Restaurant Corp. (613 A.2d 916 (D.C. 1992))
      case
    • Sundberg v. TTR Realty, LLC (109 A.3d 1123 (D.C. 2015))
      case
    • Steiner v. American Friends of Lubavitch (Chabad) (177 A.3d 1246 (D.C. 2018))
      case
    • Dyer v. Bilaal (983 A.2d 349 (D.C. 2009))
      case
    • Osborne v. Howard University Physicians, Inc. (904 A.2d 335 (D.C. 2006))
      case
    • Sind v. Pollin (356 A.2d 653 (D.C. 1976))
      case
    • Bank of America, N.A. v. District of Columbia (80 A.3d 650 (D.C. 2013))
      case
    • Woodroof v. Cunningham (147 A.3d 777 (D.C. 2016))
      case
    • Aziken v. District of Columbia (70 A.3d 213 (D.C. 2013))
      case
    • Unit Owners Association of 2337 Champlain Street Condominium v. 2337 Champlain Street, LLC (314 A.3d 1198 (D.C. 2024))
      case
    • DSP Venture Group, Inc. v. Allen (830 A.2d 850 (D.C. 2003))
      case
    • In re Wilde (68 A.3d 749 (D.C. 2013))
      case
    • Tippett v. Daly (10 A.3d 1123 (D.C. 2010))
      case
    • Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 176(1) (1981)
      restatement
  3. Date not availableArbitration

    Date not availableArbitration

    Final Arbitration Award

    JAMS

    Decision summary
    The final award allocated Wye Oak’s contingency fee among the law firms as follows: Pavich Law Group, 18 percent; Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, 27.5 percent; Kalbian Hagerty, 0.5 percent; and Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola, 0 percent.

    Participants

    Pavich Law Group
    Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP
    Kalbian Hagerty, LLP
    Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered
    JAMS
    Arbitrator
    Richard A. Levie

Matter record

Report a correction

Quinn, Racusin & Gazzola Chartered v. Pavich Law Group, P.C., et al. (District of Columbia Court of Appeals Nos. 25-CV-0086 & 25-CV-0229) · Matter