Software
Seasoned Litigators in Failed ERP Implementations
Kasowitz has established the country’s foremost practice helping companies and public entities address business disruptions and financial losses resulting from failed and problematic implementations of enterprise resource planning (ERP) business software.
For more than two decades, Kasowitz’s deep bench of litigators and trial lawyers have represented companies, states and municipalities in disputes against software providers and integrators concerning ERP projects experiencing runaway costs, poor project management, delayed or failed go-lives, defective interfaces, missing functionality and other issues. We have substantial experience in disputes involving failed implementations of SAP, Oracle, Microsoft and other ERP and business software across a wide array of industries—including apparel and footwear, chemical, consumer goods, electronics, financial services, gas and electricity, health care, insurance, logistics, transportation and warehousing—. 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. Companies facing the business disruption and chaos stemming from an oversold and improperly designed and implemented ERP rollout turn to us to obtain redress and monetary compensation from the responsible consulting or software firms.
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 and have consistently obtained significant recoveries for clients damaged by failed ERP projects.
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.
We also frequently counsel our clients across an array of industries, including public entities, in connection with negotiating and drafting software licensing and implementation contracts.
Work Highlights
The State of Hawaii in an action alleging fraud, False Claims Act violations and other claims against technology firm Ciber and its insurers stemming from an implementation of Oracle software for the State’s Department of Transportation, resulting in a $31 million recovery, exceeding the $7 million Hawaii paid to Ciber for the failed ERP project.
Copart in a four-week jury trial resulting in a $20 million verdict against Sparta Consulting and its parent, KPIT Infosystems, for fraud and professional negligence stemming from an implementation of SAP software.
National Grid in an action against a software vendor stemming from a $1 billion implementation of SAP software.
Levi Strauss & Co. in an action against Deloitte Consulting stemming from an implementation of SAP’s apparel and footwear software.
Certified Collectibles Group in an action against Globant stemming from a customized ERP software system.
Lubrizol, a global specialty chemicals company, in an action against IBM stemming from an implementation of SAP S/4HANA.
Avnet in an action alleging fraud and other claims against Deloitte Consulting stemming from an implementation of SAP software.
ScanSource in an action against Avanade stemming from an implementation of Microsoft Dynamics AX software.
W.C. Bradley in an action alleging fraud and breach of contract stemming from an implementation of SAP software.
Avantor Performance Materials in an action against IBM stemming from an implementation of SAP software and an IBM software product.
County of Marin, California in an action against Deloitte Consulting stemming from an implementation of SAP’s public sector software.
Waste Management in an action alleging fraud and other claims against SAP stemming from an implementation of SAP’s waste and recycling software.
Bart A. Brown, Jr., the Chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee of FoxMeyer, a drug distribution company, in actions against SAP, Accenture and logistics software vendors stemming from implementations of SAP and warehouse management software.
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce in an action alleging fraud and other claims against a leading software developer stemming from a failed CRM software implementation.
A leading toy company in a dispute with a major consulting firm stemming from a defective e-commerce platform that led to “Cyber Monday” shipping and billing issues.
A public university system in a dispute with a leading software developer stemming from an implementation of ERP software.
A leading health care provider in a dispute with a software developer stemming from an implementation of insurance claims processing software.
A leading distribution company in a dispute with a leading consulting firm stemming from an implementation of ERP software.
A leading logistics company in a dispute with a software provider stemming from an implementation of ERP software.
One of the country’s largest religious charities in a dispute with a software provider stemming from an implementation of ERP software for fundraising entities.
An oil refining company in a dispute with a leading consulting firm stemming from an implementation of ERP software.
Hedge funds, mutual funds and private equity firms in disputes with financial-services software providers.