[Photo: calbuzz.com]

Merging two BigLaw firms is challenging. More so, if one of the firms faces a $155 million gender bias class action.

Kerrie Campbell, a partner at Chadbourne & Parke, sued the firm in August, saying Chadbourne underpaid her by $2.7 million when compared to her male counterparts and that the firm was run by an “all-male dictatorship,” which makes decisions regarding firm partners in a “black box.” Even though Campbell was made equity partner in 2014, the Washington, D.C. litigator argues that she was a de facto employee, saying the firm is governed by a small, 5-person management committee, which controls decisions over hiring and firing.

Now, lawyers at Proskauer Rose , who are representing Chadbourne, are trying to convince a federal judge to dismiss the case on summary judgment, on the premise that Campbell is not an employee, and therefore cannot bring the Title VII and Equal Pay Act lawsuit under federal law.

While this has been a closely-watched lawsuit in the legal industry because it raises broad questions about whether big law firms fairly treat their female and minority partners, there is one other, overriding question that is at the core of this case:

Can a partner at a large law firm be considered an employee?

Given that the case will turn on whether Campbell is an employee, the litigation has focused on how Chadbourne is structured as a business.

All told, this lawsuit can, and likely will, influence - if not derail - the pending merger between Norton Rose Fulbright and Chadbourne & Parke.