The family of the late Daniel Lilley, Maine’s highest-profile lawyer, is accusing a former bookkeeper of embezzling more than $850,000 from his law firm over a little more than four years, reports the Portland Press Herald.

Plaintiffs allege that Jaime Butler, the bookkeeper for Lilley’s Portland law firm, repeatedly wrote checks to herself totaling $844,000 and also improperly diverted $12,000 in cash.

The family’s lawyer said  that “Butler issued herself ‘dozens of checks’ in some months and that the alleged embezzlement began almost immediately after she was hired as the law firm’s bookkeeper in early 2013,” writes Edward D. Murphy.

Read the Press Herald article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

A federal judge in Seattle has temporarily blocked a Justice Department order that called on a local immigrant-rights organization to stop some of its legal work. His ruling also applies to similar groups around the country. according to The Seattle Times.

The nonprofit Northwest Immigrant Rights Project brought the lawsuit that resulted in the ruling by U.S. District Judge Richard Jones.

“In a letter last month, the Justice Department told the group it must ‘cease and desist’ providing certain legal assistance to immigrants unless it undertakes full representation of them in court,” writes reporter Nina Shapiro.

The ruling also barred the Justice Department from sending similar orders to any other organizations around the nation.

Read the Seattle Times article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Bloomberg Law is reporting that Proskauer Rose has become the latest Big Law firm to be hit with a gender discrimination lawsuit by a female partner.

The plaintiff brought the case against her employer under a pseudonym. 

“According to the redacted complaint filed Friday, the plaintiff, an unnamed partner in Proskauer’s Washington, D.C. office, was objectified by male partners who made inappropriate comments about her physical appearance, paid less than male partners who were similarly or less productive than she was, and excluded from projects and client development activities once she began complaining,” writes reporter Stephanie Russell-Kraft.

The defendant responded by saying the suit is “groundless” and “meritless.”

Read the Bloomberg article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Unhappy with his boss and former friend’s close association with the Trump administration, David Magerman aired his concerns about Renaissance Technologies President Robert Mercer in a February interview with the Wall Street Journal, according to a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media.

Although the hedge fund’s legal department had assured the research scientist that his interview would not violate company policy, Magerman was fired shortly after publication of the article, which labeled Mercer a racist.

The former partner is now fighting back with a wrongful termination lawsuit, which should serve as a cautionary tale for all companies, says Dallas labor and employment attorney Leiza Dolghih of Godwin Bowman & Martinez.

“It is important for a company to establish and enforce clear rules on media interaction, particularly in situations such as this where you have high profile leadership or there is a potential for controversy. Here you had an employee who claimed that the Chief Compliance Officer orally told him that his interview was authorized,” she says. “No matter how respected he may have been at the firm, Magerman was known to have divergent views that were likely to be explored during the course of the interview. Even in instances where an employee is allowed to talk with the media, you cannot give them blanket assurances about repercussions.”

Image by NY Photographic

A recent decision of the New Jersey Appellate Division considered the enforceability of arbitration agreements by non-signatories, writes Marissa Tillem in Proskauer Rose’s Minding Your Business blog.

She discusses a case in which the plaintiff filed a putative class action complaint against defendant alleging violations of New Jersey’s Truth-In-Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act, as well as the state’s Lemon Law.

The panel determined, among other things, that by signing a lease agreement, plaintiff agreed to arbitrate her dispute not only with the underlying signatories of the lease, but with any of its affiliates. Now the plaintiff will need to decide whether to pursue her claims in arbitration, Tillem explains.

Read the article.

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP will present a complimentary webinar titled “Effectively Using Offers of Judgment” on Thursday, May 18, at 11 a.m. Central time.

In the third webinar series of the year, Brittany Kirk will provide an introduction to Offers of Judgment, discussing how to leverage this risk-shifting tool to avoid litigation and its associated costs.

This presentation will discuss:

• When is the Offer of Judgment an effective litigation tool
• How to draft a precise Offer of Judgment
• Using Offers of Judgment to moot class actions after Campbell-Ewald
• State Offer of Judgment statutes

Anyone with questions may contact Missy Davis: melissa.davis@dinsmore.com

Register for the webinar.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

A St. Louis jury has awarded a Virginia woman a record-setting $110.5 million in the latest lawsuit alleging that using Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder caused cancer, according to an Associated Press report.

The verdict for Lois Slemp comes after three previous St. Louis juries awarded a total of $197 million to plaintiffs who made similar claims. About 2,000 state and federal lawsuits are in courts across the country over concerns about health problems caused by prolonged talcum powder use.

“Slemp, who was diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2012, blames her illness on her use of the company’s talcum-containing products for more than 40 years,” the AP report says. “Her cancer has spread to her liver. Although she was too ill to attend the trial, an audiotape of her deposition testimony was played. In it she said: ‘I trusted Johnson & Johnson. Big mistake.'”

Read the AP article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

The top lawyer at Fox News finds herself the subject of speculation about whether she may be following the company’s former president out the door in the wake of complaints of sexual harassment or racial discrimination at the network.

Financial Times reports that Dianne Brandi, executive vice president of legal and business affairs, is named in three lawsuits that the network is contesting.

In one of the suits, Andrea Tantaros, a Fox News host, filed a suit against the company and Brandi, alleging that Brandi failed to investigate allegations of misconduct. Fox News and Brandi have denied the allegations in all the suits.

The Washington Post reports that Brandi was one of the senior executives “who engaged in a concerted effort to silence Tantaros by threats, humiliation, and retaliation.”

Hollywood Reporter has a story saying that Brandi is particularly vulnerable if more heads roll at Fox News.

Read The Washington Post article.

Read the Financial Times article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Sometimes a temporary restraining order, or TRO, can provide immediate relief from the court system when a party can show irreparable harm will be caused if someone is allowed to remain in control of assets that belong to the company, according to an article posted on the website of Mehendru P.C.

“It may be that a competitor has interfered with a business contract, an employee has stolen your trade secrets or breached a non-compete agreement, or a business partner has stolen from your company.  You have to go to court to protect the company though you’d rather not,” the post reads.

A judge can grant a TRO to stop an individual’s actions even without that person or his lawyer being in court. And a TRO provides immediate relief from the court system when a party can show irreparable harm will be caused if someone is allowed to remain in control of assets that belong to the company.

Read the article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Zapproved has published a free whitepaper revealing e-discovery insights on cases involving Volkswagen, Apple, Samsung and Takata. The paper can be downloaded.

• Apple
• Samsung
• Volkswagen AG
• Takata

While these cases paint a portrait of what not to do, they also illustrate why building a culture of compliance is so vital, Zapproved says on its website. The paper reveals three key takeaways:

• First, create and maintain a culture of compliance that champions ethical practices.
• Second, know the rules that apply to cross-border litigation, particularly discovery, and ensure that all participants understand those multinational rules.
• Finally, adopt smart, automated and secure e-discovery processes.

Download the white paper.

Plano, Texas attorney Jason Van Dyke was all set to begin a new chapter of his legal career as an assistant district attorney in Victoria County. So he was startled to receive notice that the District Attorney’s office had rescinded its job offer with no explanation. Van Dyke speculates the reversal could be related to media coverage of a Twitter exchange he had involving a case he was working on in 2014. He has since filed suit seeking answers from Victoria County.

In a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing, Rhonda Reddick quotes Dallas labor and employment attorney Leiza Dolghih of Godwin Bowman & Martinez, who says this is a cautionary tale for both employers and job-seekers.

The post continues:

“Many employers these days Google prospective hires and look them up on social media for any evidence of red flags that indicate that the applicant may be violent, unethical, unstable or simply have bad judgment. These behind-the-scenes, informal background checks often result in rejection, or even withdrawal, of a job offer,” she says.

While a Texas employer may reject a prospective candidate for a myriad of reasons, including social media activity, a prospective employee cannot be rejected on the basis of race, gender, religion, age or other protective categories – information that can often be gleaned from social media. If a candidate can show that a job rejection was based on information protected under employment law, there could be basis for a claim of discrimination.

“However, in this case, if the employer discovered what they considered unsavory comments, or possible evidence of poor judgment or lack of self-control, after offering Mr. Van Dyke a job, the withdrawal of that offer based on the newly discovered information, would be acceptable,” says Ms. Dolghih. “While everyone has the right to speak their mind freely, that speech may result in rather harsh consequences in terms of employment.”

Join Our LinkedIn Group

The purpose of a settlement and release agreement is to fully and finally dispose of a disputed matter, explains Stacy L. La Scala, a neutral writing for JAMS.

“However, more and more often, a dispute cannot be fully resolved where non­parties to the dispute have contributed defense and indemnity amounts on behalf of one or more of the parties and have reserved the right to seek recovery of those amounts in subsequent litigation,” he cautions.

In the article, published on JDSupra.com, he writes:

In particular, where insurance carriers have actually provided a defense and/or indemnity in an action, those carriers in a number of jurisdictions have potential rights against their insureds, pursuant to reservation of rights for uncovered claims; potential rights against those entities who are principally responsible for the loss; and potential rights against contractually obligated indemnitors of their insureds. The carriers are typically not part of the action and are not signatories to the settlement agreement.

Read the article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

An expanded lawsuit filed Tuesday accuses Fox News Channel of racial discrimination “that appears more akin to Plantation-style management than a modern-day work environment,” reports the Associated Press.

Eight former and current Fox employees joined an existing case involving three former Fox workers who have accused a since-fired Fox financial executive of bias. It also expands the case to include Dianne Brandi, Fox’s chief counsel.

Fox News has denied the allegations.

“One plaintiff, on-air personality Kelly Wright, who’s black, said he’d been effectively sidelined and asked to perform the role of a Jim Crow, an insulting slang term to refer to a black man, according to the lawsuit. Wright said [Bill] O’Reilly, who’s white, refused to show a piece Wright had prepared after racial protests in Ferguson, Missouri, because they showed blacks in too positive a light,” writes AP reporter David Bauder.

Read the AP article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

The new Association of Women Lawyers of the Eastern District of Texas (WLED) was established with the first general order of 2017 issued by Eastern District Chief Judge Ron Clark in recognition of “the large number of outstanding female lawyers who practice in the Eastern District and the contribution they have made and continue to make to the district.”

WLED, an affiliate of the Eastern District of Texas Bar Association, will provide mentoring and networking opportunities for women lawyers practicing in the Eastern District.

Judge Clark appointed Elizabeth “Beth” Forrest from the Plano, Texas, office of Siebman, Burg, Phillips & Smith, LLP, as Chairperson for the WLED Organizational Committee. Amanda Abraham of The Roth Law Firm in Marshall, Texas, has been named Secretary/Treasurer, and Evelyn Chen, in-house counsel at Ericsson in Plano, has been named Vice Chairperson.

Eastern District Judge Marcia Crone of Beaumont, Texas; Eastern District Chief Bankruptcy Judge Brenda Rhoades of Plano; and Eastern District Magistrate Judges Caroline Craven of Texarkana, Texas; Nicole Mitchell of Tyler, Texas; Christine Nowak of Sherman, Texas; and Kimberly Priest Johnson of Plano will serve as the inaugural judicial liaisons to WLED.

“WLED’s goal is to provide a continuing forum where the many experienced women attorneys and judges in the Eastern District can provide advice and moral support to all our members, especially younger trial attorneys,” says Ms. Forrest. “Their insights and our shared experiences will help us develop our careers and assume the mantle of lead trial counsel in an increasingly competitive legal market.”

Membership in WLED is open to anyone who is committed to the group’s ethics and goals and who works toward the success of women trial attorneys, including fostering a deep bench of talented women lawyers as lead counsel in the Eastern District of Texas.

For more information on WLED and to learn how to become a member, contact Ms. Forrest at elizabethforrest@siebman.com.

In his Petes’ Take blog for  Porzio, Bromberg & Newman,  Peter J. Gallagher describes a New Jersey case in which a court ruled that a clear arbitration provision, negotiated by a sophisticated party while represented by counsel, is enforceable.

In Columbus Circle NJ LLC v. Island Construction Co., LLC, the appellate court held that the arbitration provision in the AIA contract used in this case satisfied the requirements to explain to the signer the possible consequences of giving up the right to adjudication in a court of law, Gallagher explains.

“By its terms, the provision required plaintiff to choose between arbitration and ‘litigation in a court of competent jurisdiction,’ therefore, when plaintiff chose ‘arbitration,’ it did so ‘with full knowledge that arbitration [was] a substitute for the right to have [its] claim adjudicated in court.’ Moreover, the Appellate Division noted that neither the LLC nor its sole member was ‘an average member of the public,'” according to Gallagher.

Read the article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Partners at the law firm Chadbourne & Parke, in an unusual public gesture, voted on Thursday to expel from its ranks a female partner who filed a gender discrimination and pay inequity lawsuit against the firm last year, according to a New York Times report.

Campbell argued her case before the partners of the firm, but in a poll of the partnership conducted by telephone, she cast the only vote against expulsion. About 70 partners voted to expel her from the firm, Chadbourne said in a statement.

“On Monday, a federal district judge in Manhattan rebuffed her effort to block the vote, which her lawyers argued was retaliation for her lawsuit, which seeks $100 million and claims that the firm paid female partners less than their male counterparts and denied them advancement opportunities,” reports Elizabeth Olson. “Two other female partners have joined the lawsuit since it was filed in August in Federal District Court in Manhattan.”

Read the NYT article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

The widow of a partner at the Reed Smith law firm won a $3 million verdict Thursday in a lawsuit against a pharmaceutical company that she blamed for her husband’s suicide, reports The Chicago Tribune.

“Wendy Dolin’s husband, Stewart, stepped in front of a CTA Blue Line train in the Loop on July 15, 2010. He had been taking paroxetine, a drug for depression and anxiety, and his widow claimed in her lawsuit that GlaxoSmithKline failed to warn her husband’s doctor of the drug’s increased risk of suicidal behavior, leading to his death,” writes reporter Grace Wong.

GlaxoSmithKline’s defense was that Dolin was taking a generic version of Paxil, manufactured by another company. But the judge hearing the case released the maker of the generic, saying it had no control of the drug’s label.

Read the Tribune article.

The bitter child custody trial pitting high-profile internet radio host Alex Jones against his ex-wife has begun in an Austin courtroom. Jones’ attorneys are arguing that the angry, volatile personality evident from his Infowars website and radio show is “performance art” and doesn’t reflect his fitness as a parent, according to a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

“It’s going to be a fascinating tightrope for him to walk because the jury will have to decide who is the real Alex Jones,” says Austin-based Weisbart Springer Hayes attorney Geoff Weisbart, who is closely following the case. “He may be in a bit of a lose-lose situation because, if successful at trial, that defense could ultimately damage his credibility with his core audience. That’s obviously a risk he’s willing to take.”

Weisbart also notes the court of Judge Orlinda Naranjo is one of the few in the state that allows jurors to submit questions to the witnesses as a part of their testimony. “While the judge has made it clear that the focus is going to be on the best interests of the three children involved, it will be fascinating to see what questions the members of the jury have for Mr. Jones.”

Image by Robert Huffstutter

Fresh allegations this week of misconduct by Fox News host Bill O’Reilly have reduced the likelihood that he’ll return to the network, reports Bloomberg, and now the company has hired law firm Paul Weiss to investigate the claims.

“Pressure is rising on Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox Inc., the parent of the conservative-leaning news network, to make a decision on O’Reilly’s fate as advertisers flee his show. O’Reilly, the channel’s most popular host, pulls in tens of millions of dollars a year in ad revenue, “writes Anousha Sakoui. “The network has said he’ll return to his show April 24 after a previously scheduled vacation.”

Marc E. Kasowitz is the lawyer representing O’Reilly during his legal trouble.

Read the Bloomberg article.

Join Our LinkedIn Group

Mark Lanier

Trial lawyer Mark Lanier was not looking for new cases when two Idaho attorneys called him earlier this year with an appeal to what he described as his “core sense of right and wrong,” according to a post on the website of Androvett Legal Media & Marketing.

The Androvett post continues:

The always-busy Houston lawyer recently earned a $1 billion  product liability verdict against J&J and is gearing up for numerous other trials. But when he heard more about the case involving Antwon McDaniel, a developmentally disabled teen who was bullied and raped at a rural Idaho high school, the decision to join the legal team was an easy one.

“It’s outrageous. It’s horrible,” Mr. Lanier told the Magic Valley Times-News. “As a lawyer, if I can help in a case like this and I don’t, they ought to take away my bar card.”

The federal lawsuit, filed last year, claims that the individually named school board trustees, administrators, teachers and coaches of the Dietrich School District chose to ignore the ongoing physical and mental abuse being suffered by Antwon McDaniel, effectively depriving him of his constitutional rights. The racially motivated violence inflicted on the now 19-year-old Mr. McDaniel, who is black, included anal rape with a coat hanger by several white football teammates in 2015. Criminal cases stemming from the locker room attack have all been resolved, but the civil lawsuit seeking $10 million is ongoing, with the next hearing set for May 9. Trial dates have not yet been scheduled.

Mr. Lanier described his decision to join the lawsuit in an interview with the Times-News:

“My goal is to make sure no student in Idaho or anywhere else has this problem again,” [Mr. Lanier] said. “We need to do something to protect our children who don’t fit in, aren’t the right color, aren’t the right religion and don’t fit that model profile. There’s a chance to do something here.”

There were three main motivating factors, Mr. Lanier said. The need for the school district to be responsible; the “egregiousness of it all”; and because he “cares deeply about racial issues.”

“America is at a place where we have to find a way to be accepting of people of different race, religion, gender, or even political affiliation,” Mr. Lanier said.