UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16326 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04882-JD

v. HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP, Defendant-Appellee.

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16327 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04883-JD

v. PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN LLP, Defendant-Appellee. 2 DIAMOND V. HOGAN LOVELLS

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16328 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04884-JD

v. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP, Defendant-Appellee.

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16329 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04885-JD

v. PERKINS COIE LLP, Defendant-Appellee.

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16330 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04886-JD

v. NEAL, GERBER & EISENBERG LLP, Defendant-Appellee. DIAMOND V. HOGAN LOVELLS 3

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16331 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04887-JD

v. KASOWITZ BENSON TORRES LLP, Defendant-Appellee.

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16332 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04888-JD

v. SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP, Defendant-Appellee. 4 DIAMOND V. HOGAN LOVELLS

ALLAN B. DIAMOND, Chapter 7 No. 15-16333 Trustee of the Estate of Howrey LLP, D.C. No. Plaintiff-Appellant, 3:14-cv-04889-JD

v. ORDER JONES DAY, CERTIFYING Defendant-Appellee. QUESTIONS TO THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

Filed February 27, 2018

Before: Ronald M. Gould and Mary H. Murguia, Circuit Judges, and Nancy Freudenthal, * Chief District Judge.

* The Honorable Nancy Freudenthal, Chief United States District Judge for the District of Wyoming, sitting by designation. DIAMOND V. HOGAN LOVELLS 5

SUMMARY **

Certified Questions

Concluding that the claims of a trustee for the bankruptcy estate of a law firm turned on the answers to unresolved questions of District of Columbia partnership law concerning the scope of the interest, if any, that a partnership has in client matters started at the partnership but completed at another firm, the panel certified the following three questions to the District of Columbia Court of Appeals:

(1) Under District of Columbia law does a dissociated partner owe a duty to his or her former law firm to account for profits earned post-departure on legal matters that were in progress but not completed at the time of the partner’s departure, where the partner’s former law firm had been hired to handle th