Attorneys representing former Power Home Solar LLC CEO William Jayson Waller have urged a Michigan federal judge to deny a motion seeking their disqualification from a fraud and racketeering suit. The lawyers, from DarrowEverett LLP, argued Wednesday that the plaintiffs’ claims of conflicts of interest lack legal or factual merit and are an untimely tactic designed to disrupt the defense.

Solar Atty DQ Request response : No Grounds for Disqualification

In their response, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, DarrowEverett stated that their past in-house legal work for Power Home Solar—rebranded as Pink Energy and now defunct—does not create a conflict of interest barring them from representing Waller.

The firm dismissed the plaintiffs’ accusations as baseless, contending that no current or former DarrowEverett clients have objected to their representation of Waller.

“Plaintiffs’ reliance on claimed conflicts of interest is not in furtherance of the interests of current or former DarrowEverett clients but is, rather, an untimely smokescreen to remove the firm from this lawsuit for [the] plaintiffs' convenience,” the response said.

The case stems from allegations that Power Home Solar, Waller, and private equity backers Trivest Partners LP and TGIF Power Home Investor orchestrated a fraudulent scheme to sell overpriced solar energy systems to Michigan residents. The plaintiffs—represented by Aaron Hall, Katherine Glod, and Jeffrey Binder—filed a motion on Nov. 6 accusing DarrowEverett of multiple conflicts of interest and delaying discovery.

Plaintiffs’ Allegations

The plaintiffs allege that DarrowEverett attorneys, including firm chair Zachary Darrow, held roles as C-suite officers and legal counsel for the solar energy company, making them potential witnesses in the case. The motion also suggested Darrow could be an unnamed participant in the alleged RICO conspiracy.

Further, the plaintiffs argued that the firm’s fiduciary obligations to Power Home Solar’s bankruptcy trustee conflict with Waller’s interests in the suit.

Firm’s Defense Against Claims

DarrowEverett countered that Power Home Solar is not a party to the suit and emphasized that no involved entity has objected to their role in the litigation. They argued that even if firm members were required to testify, disqualification would only apply to the individual lawyer, not the entire firm.

The firm also criticized the plaintiffs for waiting over a year to raise these objections.

“[The] plaintiffs sat on that knowledge for over a year before acting,” the response said. “[Their] failure to raise the issue until now waives any arguable claim they could possibly have had.”

Concerns Over Tactical Motions

DarrowEverett warned against the misuse of disqualification motions, noting the potential for such motions to be wielded for strategic advantage.

“Courts should tread lightly when considering motions for disqualification,” the firm said, arguing that the plaintiffs’ motion was “untethered to facts” and designed to disrupt Waller’s defense rather than address any genuine ethical concern.

Solar Atty DQ Request response : What’s Next?

The class action accuses Power Home Solar and its backers of defrauding customers with inflated prices and misrepresentations about the efficiency of their solar systems. The company declared bankruptcy in October 2022, shortly before the lawsuit was filed.