Patton Boggs and Kate Moseley (pictured) — a former non-equity partner of the firm who sought to depose two firm leaders and to obtain certain documents — have resolved their dispute, according to lawyers for both sides who decline to disclose further details. On Feb. 17, Moseley, now a partner in Alston + Bird, filed a notice of a nonsuit with prejudice of the Rule 202 petition she previously had filed in the 298th District Court. On Feb. 20, 298th District Judge Emily G. Tobolowsky ordered a dismissal of the petition. The Rule 202 petition sought oral or written depositions prior to the filing of suit against her former firm. The legal battle between Moseley and her former firm had continued for months. Moseley left Patton Boggs' Dallas office in May 2010. In December 2010, she filed a charge of discrimination against the firm with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging she was discriminated against because of her gender, paid less than her male counterparts and denied equity partner status. On Jan. 7, 2011, she filed her Rule 202 petition, which Tobolowsky granted on July 7, 2011. But on Dec. 29, 2011, Dallas' 5th Court of Appeals conditionally granted Patton Boggs' petition for writ of mandamus, which sought to overturn Tobolowsky’s decision. But the appeals court sided with Moseley in determining Patton Boggs could not compel arbitration of her claims pursuant to her partnership agreement. Rogge Dunn, a partner in Dallas' Clouse Dunn who represents Moseley, and Rod Phelan, a partner the Dallas office of Baker Botts, who represents Patton Boggs, confirm the two sides have resolved their differences. But they both decline to give further details of the deal.
-- Miriam Rozen