According to court papers obtained Monday, Superior Court Judge Soussan G. Bruguera ordered XtraJet owner Jeffrey Borer and his company to pay Geragos at least $10 million and possibly up to $18 million in compensatory and punitive damages. Geragos' colleague Pat Harris was awarded between $1.25 million and $2.25 million in damages.

The amount of damages is dependent on whether both the company and Borer are separately responsible for punitive damages, or just Borer. Geragos' legal team claims the former, while Borer's claims the latter.

A court spokeswoman was not immediately able to clarify the discrepancy.

"Defendant Borer was the mastermind behind a scheme to desecrate and exploit sacred attorney-client communications for personal profit," Brugera wrote in the 21-page judgment filed Friday.

Geragos' and Harris' attorney Brian J. Kabateck said he was pleased with the decision.

"This is an important day for lawyers who generally represent celebrities and high profile people," he said.

Borer's lawyer, Lloyd Kirschbaum, said his client will appeal. He contended the attorney-client relationship could not have been breached because the video recording did not have sound.

"There was not any sound," he said. "You can't intercept a communication without sound."

Borer and co-defendant Arvel Jett Reeves pleaded guilty last year to felony counts of conspiracy. They acknowledged they installed two digital video recorders in a Gulfstream jet that flew Jackson from Las Vegas to Santa Barbara. XtraJet, which was based in Santa Monica, California, has since gone bankrupt, according to Kirschbaum.

Reeves was sentenced to eight months in prison.

Borer was sentenced to six months home detention rather than prison because he said he was the caregiver for his wife, who had chronic health problems. He spent part of that confinement at the Ritz-Carlton hotel in Marina del Rey, California, saying his house had a mold problem and his wife was allergic.

The damages resulted from an invasion-of-privacy lawsuit filed by Geragos and Harris. Jackson, who was initially a plaintiff in the civil lawsuit, later dropped out of the case.

The pop singer was acquitted of the molestation charges in 2005.

They call him "psychologically abusive." He insists their "venomous attacks" and "reckless hyperbole" are motivated by greed and personal vendettas.

They say they were appalled by his "fiscal and executive mismanagement" and "reckless and wasteful spending." He dismisses their accusations as "baseless and defamatory."

It's the kind of overheated language that often has aggrieved parties hiring lawyers. But in this case, lawyers themselves are making the angry allegations. And their dispute is detailed in a tell-all lawsuit that lays bare an ugly business divorce, the kind usually settled behind closed doors.

The case, which goes to arbitration this month, involves the acrimonious breakup of the founders of Donovan Hatem, a 50-lawyer Boston law firm. Nine former partners have sued the firm and founder David J. Hatem, whom they describe as jealous, tyrannical, and dictatorial, claiming they are owed a collective $2 million in unpaid compensation.

The lawyers, who left the firm last summer to open a new Boston firm, LeClairRyan, accuse Hatem of manipulating the firm's finances to prevent them from be ing fairly paid. They also allege he wrote off bills for favored clients, spent lavishly on marketing to promote mainly himself, and wasted money on first-class travel that he billed to the firm rather than to his clients.

In legal filings, Hatem has lashed back, arguing that his former partners are trying to humiliate and destroy a firm with which they now compete. He accuses one of them of billing Donovan Hatem for New England Patriots season tickets that went to clients of their new firm, and says the incompetent legal work of two others resulted in a pending malpractice allegation that could cost Donovan Hatem $50,000.

"This is all very much about Mr. Hatem not wanting to pay his partners," said Warren D. Hutchison, a plaintiff in the lawsuit who had worked with Hatem for nearly 20 years. "He really considers nobody of any value other than himself, and he was incapable of recognizing the worth in his former partners."

Hatem's lawyer, Michael E. Mone, did not return a call. But in legal documents, Mone asserts the plaintiffs sued "to embarrass and harm their former partners, particularly Mr. Hatem," and calls their case "an outrageous and salacious effort to leverage a quick payment of money to which they are not entitled."

A call to Hatem was returned by Andrew M. Paven of O'Neill and Associates, a Boston public relations firm. In a statement provided by Paven, the firm described the suit as "baseless and defamatory."

Donovan Hatem was established in 2001 by John A. Donovan Jr., who died of cancer in 2005, and Hatem, who specializes in representing architects, engineers, construction firms, and the companies that insure them. Both men left the Boston firm Burns & Levinson to launch their practice, taking 38 other Burns & Levinson lawyers - a third of the firm - with them.

The name of the Bryan Cave law firm has come up in pretrial legal battles in the criminal case against politically connected entrepreneur Antoin "Tony" Rezko.

In a footnote to a motion last week seeking to exclude some government evidence against Rezko, his defense lawyers disclosed for first time that prosecutors have alleged that Rezko paid a $1.5 million bribe to Iraq's former electricity minister to obtain a contract in that country. The alleged bribe was paid from an escrow account held by Bryan Cave, prosecutors said.

Rezko's lawyers said that every aspect of the bribe claim is "demonstrably false."

The bribe allegation is unrelated to the federal influence-peddling and fraud charges against Rezko, whose trial began Monday with jury selection. Its disclosure shows the scope of Rezko's relationship with lawyers who have represented his real estate and restaurant businesses in civil matters.

Another law firm, Freeborn & Peters, was identified by prosecutors last month for its involvement in a $3.5 million overseas wire transfer to Rezko and his associates. The government did not suggest anything illegal on the law firm's part, but evidence of the wire transfer led a federal judge to revoke Rezko's bail in January.

Another one of Rezko's lawyers, Gene Murphy, was a partner in Bryan Cave's Chicago office from April 2004 to August 2005. When Murphy left Bryan Cave, the firm stopped representing Rezko, said Jeffrey Morof, the head of Bryan Cave's Chicago office.

Murphy, who has started his own law firm, said the claim that an alleged bribe came from a Bryan Cave account is "absolutely baseless." He declined further comment on Rezko, other than adding that he no longer represents him.

Morof also denied that the firm had any involvement in an alleged transfer of funds to the former electricity minister.

The bribe allegation came up in a private hearing held in the judge's chambers, according to Rezko's lawyers. A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office declined to comment.

Blogger unmasked: A vocal critic of some patent lawsuits who blogged anonymously under the pseudonym "Patent Troll Tracker" has revealed himself after being pressured by one of his frequent targets. The blogger is Rick Frenkel, an intellectual-property lawyer at Cisco Systems.

He recently disclosed on his blog that he faced an e-mail threat of being named. In his blog, he tracked lawsuits by companies that acquired patents solely to sue for infringement. Chicago lawyer Raymond Niro represents a number of these entities that have come to be known by the derogatory term of patent trolls.

Niro, tired of being criticized anonymously in the blog, had recently offered a $10,000 bounty for anyone who unmasked the blogger. Niro said no one has stepped forward to claim the reward.

On the move: Assistant U.S. Atty. Daniel Rubinstein has joined Greenberg & Traurig's Chicago office as a shareholder, the firm's equivalent of partner. He worked in the U.S. attorney's office in Chicago for four years, primarily in the complex fraud section. ... Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal hired Brian Lambert as its chief marketing officer. He most recently was at Wachovia Corp., where he was head of business development in the treasury services division. ... Jennifer Nijman, a former president of the Chicago Bar Association, has left Winston & Strawn to start her own firm with Susan Franzetti, a solo practitioner who previously worked at Sonnenschein. Their practice will focus on representing businesses in environmental matters.

The first fully implemented year of Medicare's recovery audit contractors in Florida was a costly one for health care providers.

They returned nearly $125 million to the government last year, a report by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid showed.

The pilot program in Florida, New York and California ends on March 27. Then, CMS will select four regional auditing companies to run the national program starting later this year.

Of the $371 million in improper Medicare payments the RAC program identified in fiscal 2007, which ended Sept. 30, they found $128.7 million in Florida. Statewide, the auditors collected $124.6 million in overpayment from health care providers and paid them back $4.1 million for Medicare underpayments.

Florida inpatient hospitals returned $115.1 million in overpayment, outpatient hospitals returned $3.4 million and physicians returned $5.1 million. All of the money returned went to inpatient hospitals.

According to CMS, almost half of the improper payments were the result of incorrect billing coding. One-third were ruled medically unnecessary -- a category that has frustrated Florida hospitals because of the auditors second-guessing decisions of clinical staff. Starting last summer, CMS required the RAC programs to have medical directors to review claims.

Heart failure and shock was the most common type of claim where RAC found overpayment in Florida, with $9.5 million collected.

In the state, 14 percent of RAC overpayment claims were appealed, with 8.9 percent of all claims being overturned on appeal.

Many Florida hospitals executives said the RAC filed too many baseless cases because the auditors receive their fee even after the claim is overturned by an administrative law judge. In the national program, the auditors will lose their fee if the claim is overturned on appeal.

At Latham & Watkins, the international law firm, William H. Voge is the resident whiz on Dubai. And Abu Dhabi. And Qatar.

Mr. Voge, who heads the finance practice, can recite when each of the firm's investment banking clients opened offices in the Middle East. And he knows how many law firms have established outposts there too: 20 since 2005.

"This is the Silicon Valley, if you will, of the world," Mr. Voge said. "It's just beginning to take off, where clients have an increasing need for sophisticated legal advice on the ground."

Latham & Watkins plans to open three offices in the Middle East by the end of the first quarter. A competitor, Dewey & LeBoeuf, said in January that it had opened an office in Dubai. And Clifford Chance, a London law firm that has been in Dubai since 1975, plans to open an office in Abu Dhabi in late April.

The rush to the cash-rich Persian Gulf is easy to explain: Law firms are following the money.

"Where there are investment banks, you will find lawyers," said Graham Lovett, Clifford Chance's managing partner for the gulf. "I am pretty certain that some firms arrived here and don't know why they were not here already."

Consider Latham & Watkins. The Qatar Investment Authority, one of its clients, has been asking the firm to open a local branch for five years.

Latham is coming off a banner year. It took in more than $2 billion in gross revenue in 2007, a first for a United States law firm, driven by its international focus.

About 20 percent of Latham's business comes from its finance practice, and Latham interviewed 14 financial institution clients, among them Lehman Brothers, Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse, before making the plunge in the Middle East.

"They all view the gulf region as becoming an increasing player in the global economy," Mr. Voge said.

Some of Wall Street's top law firms, however, have not yet joined the race to the gulf. Davis Polk & Wardwell, for example, has no plans to open a Middle East office.

"Of our peer group of American firms, there has not been a rush, and I'm not sure there is going to be one," said Thomas J. Reid, a partner with Davis Polk's London office. India is Davis Polk's top international priority right now.

Shearman & Sterling, by contrast, has maintained an office in Abu Dhabi since 1975, mainly driven by its project finance practice. But capital markets are becoming increasingly important.

Shearman represented the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority when the sovereign wealth fund bought into Citigroup last November.

Latham, meantime, plans to have three partners in Dubai, and a total of 20 lawyers in the region, by the year's end.

Dubai, with its night life and amenities, is a big draw for the firm's young lawyers. Mr. Voge describes Dubai as a combination of New York, Las Vegas and Orlando, Fla.

A former partner in the New York office of Dorsey & Whitney is suing the Minneapolis-based law firm, claiming gender discrimination and violations of the whistleblower act, among other things.

Hennepin County District Court Judge Gary Larson heard an hour of arguments Tuesday on the Dorsey firm's motion to dismiss Kristan Peters' suit.

Peters began working as a Dorsey partner in January 2007 and left on June 23. At the core of the case is her handling of a trade secrets dispute on behalf of Wolters Kluwer Financial Services in New York. The matter drew media attention in trade publications, largely because of U.S. District Court Judge Harold Baer Jr.'s 129-page opinion criticizing Peters' behavior.

According to R. Scott Davies of Briggs and Morgan, who is representing Dorsey, Baier scolded Peters 22 times for her handling of the case. Davies said Peters played fast and loose with the litigation, lied to the court and misrepresented circumstances to the firm's partners.

Peters' lawyer James Kaster countered that the judge's behavior, not Peters', was unusual. The behavior Baer disliked -- such as scheduling a 7-hour deposition over two days and refusing to give bathroom breaks -- is not unusual, Kaster said.

Peters was denied her fair share of her $550,000 annual salary and an equity payment from the partnership, Kaster said. She claims the firm should indemnify her for issues stemming from the Kluwer litigation and seeks unspecified damages in excess of $50,000.

"The Dorsey law firm has a well-deserved reputation for excellence," Kaster said in court. "Frankly, I don't believe the treatment of Kristan Peters suits them."

He said Peters was let go because "she refused to fall on her sword" for Zach Carter, a "marquee partner" in the firm's New York office. She complained about his discriminatory behavior, ethical violations and violation of a court order to multiple members of Dorsey's managing team, the complaint said.

In his motion to dismiss the case, Davies said Peters made the claims when she could "see the writing on the wall" regarding her employment.

Peters' lawsuit claims that as a result of the complaints, she was told to resign or be fired and chose "resignation."

Davies said Peters' guaranteed $550,000 salary was "subject to her ethical duties as a lawyer." Peters did not act in good faith and is not entitled to indemnification, he said. He said it was unfair to criticize the judge.

Her conduct was "worse than unprofessional," Davies said. She deleted parts of an e-mail from the judge that she forwarded to a partner and ordered a copy made of disks despite a judge's order to return them to the court.

Davies contends she ordered a junior associate to alter documents so they could be classified as "work product." In filings, Peters claimed the destruction order was a "joke."

Davies also took issue with the gender bias claim, noting the firm's policy panel was led by managing partner Marianne Short from the time of Peters' hiring to her departure.

Peters did not attend Tuesday's hearing. Larson didn't say when he would rule, but asked the parties for an update on mediation within the week.

Birmingham law firm White Arnold & Dowd PC and fellow Birmingham firm Summey & Hennecy have merged.

Partners Sidney C. Summey and Karen M. Hennecy and their staff members recently agreed to join White Arnold & Dowd PC, which brings the firm's total staff to 17.

The move strengthens the firm's growing probate and elder law practice, a news release said.

Summey has more than 30 years of experience practicing in the probate and civil courts in Alabama and will continue his primary practice of wills, trusts and estates, assistance to litigators handling lawsuits for minors and incompetents, special needs trusts and planning, guardianships and conservatorships, elder law and litigation related to probate issues.

Hennecy will concentrate her practice on elder law issues, assisting clients and their families with matters including advance directives, durable powers of attorney, wills, trusts, asset preservation and Medicaid planning and administration of the estates of decedents and protected persons.