"A 'superior' mind is a terrible thing to waste," says first-year associate Gregory Berry, before and after he was "wrongfully" terminated from 350-member Kasowitz Benson Torres & Friedman.  Mr. Berry filed a $77 million lawsuit against he former firm over claims he was fired for bragging about his "superior legal mind." Kasowitz Benson has asked a New York state court to dismiss, insisting that former associate Gregory Berry entered into a confidential separation agreement and release in May, waiving all claims against the firm.  Kasowitz calls Berry's lawsuit a "flagrant breach" of that agreement. In the lawsuit Berry filed in August, he accused the firm and two of its partners of wrongful termination, inflicting emotional distress and harming his future employment prospects. Employment Scenario. Berry, who began working at Kasowitz Benson in September 2010 after graduating law from Penn Law School, claims he was fired shortly after he e-mailed partners asking to take on more responsibility.  "It has become clear that I have as much experience and ability as an associate many years my senior, as much skill writing and a superior legal mind to most I have met," Berry wrote in the e-mail, according to his suit. Kasowitz Benson responded to the claim by noting that Berry was an "at-will" employee - i.e., he had no specific employment contract and, according to legal doctrine, employers may terminate at-will employees “'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.” The firm claims it fired Berry after giving him 2 warnings and determining that "he failed to exercise proper judgment with respect to his communications and interactions with other attorneys at the Firm."  The firm says Berry was advised by an employment lawyer and eventually signed a separation agreement barring future claims in exchange for nearly $27,000 in severance pay and other benefits. Berry believes, however, that the separation agreement should be declared void for economic duress and undue influence.  The firm, he said, refused to discuss the terms of the agreement and said that if he wanted to sue, he should do so.  He accused the firm of withdrawing the agreement after learning Berry had hired a lawyer.  Kasowitz Benson called that claim baseless, and added that Berry's claims of economic duress and undue influence should be dismissed, since he failed to allege any specific threat. Berry "merely alleges that he was in financial straits," Kasowitz argued.  In his lawsuit, Berry said he quickly paid down his law school loans, as representatives from the firm had advised first-year associates to do. The suit is pending in state Supreme Court in Manhattan before Justice Eileen Bransten.  [Reuters, 9/20/11]