By Micah Jonah
January 10, 2026
A US technology startup that secured a $222million jury verdict against Walmart has launched legal action against the lawyers who once represented it, triggering a bitter courtroom battle over fees, strategy, and alleged malpractice.
The dispute pits Zest Labs, a firm known for developing technology that tracks the freshness of produce, against Williams Simons & Landis and the global law firm Vinson & Elkins. The firms, in turn, have accused the startup of refusing to pay legal fees after benefiting from years of litigation against the retail giant.
Williams Simons & Landis filed suit in a Texas federal court this week, arguing that Zest failed to honor payment obligations despite what it described as “extraordinary results” in the Walmart case. The firm claims Zest restructured its business, moved assets to avoid settling outstanding legal bills following a confidential settlement with Walmart.
Zest quickly fired back in a separate Texas state court case, accusing both law firms of mishandling the trade secrets lawsuit and inflating legal bills. The startup alleges the lawyers’ conduct cost it far more than it gained, arguing that it could have won as much as $420 million if the case had been handled competently from the start.
At the center of the dispute is a long running legal fight that began in 2018, when Zest accused Walmart of stealing its proprietary food, freshness technology after a business collaboration collapsed. Zest initially won $115 million in 2021, but that verdict was later thrown out after a judge ruled that key evidence had been improperly withheld.
Following a retrial last year under new legal representation, Zest secured the $222 million verdict, which was later settled under undisclosed terms. Walmart is not involved in the current lawsuits between the startup and its former attorneys.
Legal observers say the case highlights growing tensions between corporate clients and high powered law firms in complex intellectual property battles, especially when massive verdicts and contingency style fee arrangements are involved.
The lawsuits are now proceeding in parallel courts in Texas, setting the stage for another prolonged legal showdown, this time over who deserves credit and compensation for one of the largest recent trade secret verdicts in US history.
