Ford Motor Co. has narrowed a high-profile federal lawsuit accusing California lemon law attorneys of running an extensive legal billing scheme, dropping racketeering claims against several firms and lawyers while escalating allegations against three former partners of Knight Law Group.

In an amended complaint filed Monday in federal court in California, Ford withdrew its claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act against Knight Law Group LLP as an entity, along with Altman Law Group, Wirtz Law APC, and several attorneys and a former paralegal previously named in the case.

At the same time, the automaker strengthened its case against three individual attorneys formerly associated with Knight Law Group, alleging that they engaged in perjury and obstructed justice by submitting false statements to courts regarding how legal fee records were created.

The remaining defendants are former Knight Law founding partner Steve B. Mikhov, managing partner Roger Kirnos, and partner Amy Morse. Ford alleges the trio orchestrated a systematic scheme to fabricate attorney time records after lemon law cases had concluded, then presented those records to courts as contemporaneous billing entries.

Ford originally filed suit in May, accusing multiple law firms and legal professionals of inflating attorney fees in lemon law litigation under California’s Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. That statute allows prevailing consumers to recover attorney fees from auto manufacturers, a structure Ford claims was exploited through coordinated overbilling practices.

According to Ford, the alleged conduct dated back nearly a decade and resulted in tens of millions of dollars in improper fee awards. The automaker said it uncovered the alleged misconduct during an internal audit, which revealed instances where individual lawyers appeared to bill more than 24 hours in a single day or claimed to be present at overlapping court proceedings.

After the defendants moved to dismiss the original complaint, a federal judge allowed Ford to amend its claims in late November.

In its revised filing, Ford contends that recent discovery uncovered evidence that Mikhov and Kirnos repeatedly testified under oath that Knight Law Group’s billing records were prepared as work was performed. Ford alleges the records were instead created retroactively by an internal “fee motion department” designed to maximize recoveries from automakers.

The amended complaint claims this internal process relied on teams of staff tasked with drafting, reviewing, and finalizing time entries for work that Ford describes as exaggerated or entirely fictional.

Ford alleges it has already identified thousands of questionable billing entries across more than a thousand cases, attributing hundreds of thousands of dollars in allegedly improper fees to one attorney alone. The automaker claims those figures represent only a fraction of the alleged misconduct.

Ford also pushed back against arguments that the dispute centers on routine billing errors or minor time padding. Instead, the company characterized the alleged conduct as an organized and deliberate effort to mislead courts, clients, and manufacturers.

The amended complaint further alleges that the defendants pressured their own clients into restrictive representation agreements that discouraged disclosure of billing practices or independent settlement efforts.

According to Ford, the alleged misconduct went beyond aggressive advocacy and undermined the integrity of judicial proceedings by corrupting fee determinations across numerous cases.

No party commented publicly on the amended filing as of Wednesday.

Ford is represented by attorneys from Kasowitz LLP. Counsel for the various defendants include lawyers from Milbank LLP, Williams & Connolly LLP, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, Foley & Lardner LLP, Klinedinst PC, and Hecker Fink LLP.

Case: Ford Motor Co. v. Knight Law Group LLP et al.,Case No. 2:25-cv-04550,
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.