A legal dispute between a Georgia client and Morgan & Morgan has resulted in a $4.3 million (£3.19 million) arbitration award.
The shocking outcome follows a bitter conflict over a disputed $45,000 (£33,000) settlement, while the firm's founder has separately sparked controversy over his recent remarks about remote workers and employee monitoring.
Client Challenges $45,000 Settlement
An accident victim living in Marietta was awarded approximately $4.3 million (£3.19 million) following a legal battle against Morgan & Morgan over a $45,000 (£33,000) settlement he said he never authorised.
Back in March 2023, 73-year-old Robert Wyrosdick was involved in a serious crash and hired Morgan & Morgan for legal help. He later claimed the company accepted a $45,000 (£33,000) settlement for his case without asking him first.
That settlement was finalised in 2024. During the proceedings, Wyrosdick said he spoke with only one lawyer initially before being handed off to a paralegal for the remainder of the case. While Morgan & Morgan disputed his account, Wyrosdick insisted he never gave the firm the green light to accept the $45,000 (£33,000) agreement.
Morgan & Morgan and former attorney Corey Aitken maintained that Wyrosdick had verbally consented to the settlement. The firm later said an attorney received verbal client consent but failed to document it in writing.
That prompted him to pursue legal recourse, though the journey extended far beyond a standard courtroom trip, with attorneys Michael Flint and Mary Ellen Lighthiser from McClure & Kornheiser stepping in to champion his cause.
Under the terms of his contract with Morgan & Morgan, Wyrosdick had agreed to resolve any potential disagreements through arbitration instead of taking the matter to court. Consequently, Wyrosdick brought his allegations regarding legal malpractice, breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty before an arbitration panel.
Arbitration Brings $4.3 Million Award
Morgan & Morgan denied the allegations in arbitration, arguing the client failed to prove harm and pushing to block punitive damages. The arbitrator ultimately ruled in Wyrosdick's favour in July 2026, granting his claims against Morgan & Morgan and Aitken.
The arbitrator ordered approximately $4.3 million in damages, fees and costs, divided into $450,000 (£333,000) for compensatory damages, $250,000 (£185,000) for emotional distress, $413,180.33 (£306,000) in attorney's fees and $3.15 million (£2.33 million) in punitive damages.
The award was issued by arbitrator Erika Birg.
Morgan & Morgan strongly disagreed with the findings of the arbitration award, maintaining that they did not reflect the facts of the case or the work of the attorneys involved.
In a statement provided to WSB-TV, Alexander Clem, listed as an attorney at Morgan & Morgan, defended the firm. 'Our attorneys live and breathe our mission of fighting for the people, and transparency and communication with our clients are core values we take very seriously. Since 2019, Morgan & Morgan has recovered over $30 billion for our clients nationally, and anyone who wants to understand our track record of verdicts and settlements can see it for themselves at forthepeople.com,' he said.
'In Georgia, an infinitesimal .0002% of our cases lead to a claim against us. More than 99.999% of our cases proceed without issue. Whether you are a one-attorney shop or a 1,200-lawyer firm, mistakes can occasionally happen. What matters is that you make things right,' Clem added.
As the losing party, Morgan & Morgan was also ordered to cover arbitration-related administrative expenses and costs, including $19,175 (£14,200) in administrative fees, $37,125 (£27,500) for the arbitrator's pay and $37,737.50 (£28,000) to reimburse Wyrosdick for earlier expenses.
The arbitration award came as Morgan & Morgan's founder and CEO John Morgan was also attracting attention over his comments about how the firm monitors employees working from home.
John Morgan Faces Remote Work Backlash
This massive payout arrives as the firm and its leadership face intense scrutiny over employee surveillance, with founder John Morgan recently sparking backlash after warning remote staff that management would 'put a camera up your a**' to monitor productivity.
During an appearance on 'The Iced Coffee Hour' on 27 August, the 70-year-old attorney detailed his journey to establishing a massive legal firm before addressing the pushback against office returns.
Morgan pulled no punches regarding staff resistance, bluntly remarking that management would monitor workers closely and arguing that employees were simply avoiding labour altogether.
Following the rollout of stricter remote oversight, which involved demanding six-day weeks and nine-hour daily shifts, 23 workers resigned inside a week. Morgan noted that while exceptions exist for a select few, he believes the resistance stems from a desire to avoid working altogether rather than a genuine preference for remote arrangements.
Whether fighting a multi-million-dollar arbitration loss over an unapproved settlement or defending aggressive remote surveillance, Morgan & Morgan proves that intense internal pressure and controversial leadership choices can carry a heavy price, both in the arbitration room and in the public eye.
