Kasowitz has established the country’s foremost practice devoted to representing companies and public entities in the recovery of damages arising out of failed and problematic implementations of enterprise resource planning (ERP) business software. Few corporate initiatives are as fraught with risk as these high-priced projects, which often deliver a new software platform that is scarcely better than the legacy system it replaced. Even worse are ERP catastrophes – mission-critical projects that fail upon go-live, decimating customer relationships, financial results, growth and acquisition plans, investors’ and lenders’ confidence and employee morale. Many companies that have faced the business disruption and chaos stemming from an oversold and improperly designed and implemented ERP rollout have turned to our attorneys to obtain compensation from the responsible consulting or software firms.
For over 15 years, Kasowitz’s team, led by Partner Mark P. Ressler, a former federal prosecutor and seasoned trial lawyer, has obtained substantial recoveries for clients whose ERP projects have been plagued by delayed or disastrous go-lives, skyrocketing costs, deficient project management, missing functionality, excessive customization and an endless series of false assurances by the integrator or developer. Harnessing our aggressive litigation skills to our deep understanding of the technical problems that lead to failed projects (including in the areas of design, configuration, coding, testing and project management), we successfully pursue actions against leading ERP providers and more specialized software vendors.
Our role in ERP disputes typically begins when clients contact us either (1) in mid-project, as deliverable deadlines are missed, budgets are blown and integrators or developers demand costly change orders to fix their own mistakes, or (2) after go-live, as coding and interface defects disrupt ordering, shipping, accounting, procurement, inventory, payroll or other core business processes.
Notable representations include:
- Levi Strauss & Co., in an action in San Francisco state court alleging fraud and other claims against Deloitte Consulting in connection with an implementation involving SAP’s apparel and footwear software.
- Waste Management, Inc., in an action in Houston state court alleging fraud and other claims against SAP stemming from an implementation involving SAP’s waste and recycling software.
- Bridgestone Americas, Inc., in an action in Nashville federal court against IBM stemming from an implementation of SAP’s Order-to-Cash software and an IBM middleware product.
- ScanSource, Inc., in an action in Atlanta federal court against Avanade, Inc. (a joint venture of Microsoft and Accenture) stemming from an implementation of Microsoft Dynamics AX software.
- Avantor Performance Materials, Inc., in an action in New Jersey federal court against IBM stemming from an implementation of SAP software and an IBM software product.
- Jewelry Television, in an action in Knoxville federal court against Sterling Commerce stemming from an implementation of Sterling’s warehouse management, order management and purchase order software.
- The County of Marin, California, in an action in California state court against Deloitte Consulting stemming from an implementation of SAP’s public sector software.
- Bart A. Brown, Jr., the Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee of FoxMeyer Corp., a drug distribution company, in multiple actions in Wilmington federal court and Houston state court against SAP, Accenture and other software vendors stemming from implementations of SAP and warehouse management and logistics software.
- Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, in an action in New York federal court alleging fraud and other claims against Siebel Systems stemming from an implementation of customer relationship management (CRM) software.
- A leading health care provider, in a dispute with a software developer over a failed implementation of insurance claims processing software.
- One of the country’s largest religious charities, in a dispute with a leading software company over a failed implementation of a software application for not-for-profit fundraising entities.
- An internet sales company, in a dispute with a major consulting firm over an implementation of a customized software application.
- Counseling numerous clients across an array of industries, including public entities, in connection with negotiating and drafting software licensing and implementation contracts.