Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Posts tagged as:
The Eleventh Circuit has agreed to reconsider its decision last year allowing an offended employee to sue for sexual harassment over crude sexual language not directed at her, among the sources of which was a Birmingham morning talk show. [CEI "Open Market", Fulton County Daily Report, Eugene Volokh; our earlier report]
{ 1 comment }
Ken at Popehat is telling stories out of school, here and here. P.S. And the wrap-up.
{ 2 comments }
Chicago attorney Corri Fetman won a secure place in the Tasteless Lawyer-Ad Hall of Fame with her firm’s billboard showing a temptress and muscleman with the slogan: “Life’s short. Get a divorce.” She parlayed that fame into a spot as “Lawyer of Love” columnist (and subject of undressed photography) for the magazine Playboy. Now she’s suing, alleging she was sexually harassed and later deprived of her column by a lascivious executive at the publication. Her suit charges, among other things, “gender violence” and emotional distress.
Fetman lost her focus at work, grew depressed and anxious and sought medical care, [attorney Timothy] Ashe said. “Everybody has a breaking point,” he said. “She is not an overly sensitive person.”
[Chicago Tribune via Obscure Store].
{ 4 comments }
The California state bar has charged San Francisco attorney Philip Kay, famed for sexual harassment lawsuits, “with turning two cases before three San Diego judges into three-ring circuses by repeatedly impugning court orders and caustically accusing the judges of misconduct in front of jurors. Prosecutors also claim Kay entered into an illegal fee-splitting agreement in his most high-profile case — a sexual harassment suit against mega-law firm Baker & McKenzie that in 1994 resulted in a $6.9 million San Francisco jury award for his client, former legal secretary Rena Weeks. (The judgment was later reduced to $3.5 million.)” The title quote is from San Diego judge Joan Weber, and refers to Kay’s conduct in a sexual harassment suit against Ralphs Grocery. (Mike McKee, “Famed Plaintiffs Lawyer Faces Bar Charges Over Conduct”, The Recorder, Dec. 5).
{ 3 comments }
{ 2 comments }
{ 2 comments }
We didn’t make this up. Really, we didn’t. Well-known Loyola lawprof Laurie Levenson is listed among those involved. (via Above the Law).
More: AmLaw Litigation Daily suggests some spinoffs, including “Pat: For Women in Sexual Harassment Litigation.”
{ 1 comment }
Hallowe’en party advice from employment lawyers. (Tresa Baldas, National Law Journal, Oct. 31).
{ 2 comments }
Earlier this year Ted wrote an item titled “Implausible defense department” about American Apparel founder Dov Charney’s efforts to explain away jaw-droppingly colorful facts in the latest of the multiple sexual harassment complaints he has faced. The sequel is worthy of what has gone before: it appears that Charney faked an agreement to send the case to arbitration to conceal a deal in which he agreed to settle the claim for $1.3 million. The deal later fell apart and the case is headed back for (presumably genuine) litigation. (On Point News, Workplace Prof Blog).
P.S. Overlawyered guestblogger Victoria Pynchon, of the IP ADR Blog, has now posted a more extensive and detailed report on the case, & see Nov. 16 update with company’s side of the story.
{ 4 comments }
University of Iowa professor Arthur H. Miller (who is not the NYU Law professor Arthur Miller) allegedly traded grades and offered to trade grades for second-base action with female students, appropriately resulting in criminal charges and being placed on leave by the university. Paul Caron points us to this Chronicle of Higher Education blog post that says Iowa has ordered all of its professors to undergo sensitivity training to avoid sexual harassment. Because obviously a professor who would demand students let him fondle their breasts for a grade would never have engaged in such a behavior if only he had an additional hour of sensitivity training.
What this is really about is lawsuit prevention. Just as a doctor fearful of being sued will order an inefficient, wasteful, and possibly counterproductive medical test, an employer fearful of being sued will insist upon inefficient, wasteful, and possibly counterproductive sensitivity training.
{ 11 comments }
The other nanny suing Hollywood figures Rob and Sheryl Lowe “was going to settle with the Lowes but then she too wound up being represented by [attorney Gloria] Allred”. So Laura Boyce now finds herself at the center of big legal and publicity hoopla:
Boyce’s claims don’t target Rob Lowe at all but focus on Sheryl Lowe for such off-putting behavior as walking around naked — in her own home — and making “numerous sexually crude, lascivious and racially derogatory comments,” which led Boyce to quit her job. Sheryl Lowe has denied the allegations.“The home is a workplace for the people who are working in it — the nannies, the chefs, the drivers,” says Allred. “Celebrity employers do not have special rights. They are not insulated from liability because they are in their home. Celebrities are not above the law. They don’t have license to commit sexual harassment because it’s in their home.”
Lowe has pre-emptively sued Boyce and the other Allred-represented nanny, Jessica Gibson. (Rachel Abramowitz, “Rob Lowe’s privacy, nanny woes”, Los Angeles Times, Jun. 4).
{ 2 comments }
Lisa Brockington hired employment-discrimination firm Tuckner, Sipser, Weinstock & Sipser to represent her in a discrimination lawsuit, and was impressed with her resulting settlement enough that she joined the firm as an office manager. But now Brockington is suing Tuckner, Sipser, Weinstock & Sipser on sexual harassment grounds, making a number of lurid accusations about the firm and about Jack Tuckner’s sexual practices (which the New York Post and Above the Law are kind enough to highlight for one’s titillation). Either the allegations are true, in which case the firm suffers from severe hypocrisy problems in addition to its legal troubles, or the allegations are false, in which case the firm wins settlements for plaintiffs who make false claims. Tuckner’s attorney, David Berlin, does indeed say the claims are false. More precisely, he says “[T]hese irrational and untrue charges are a reflection of the person bringing the charges.” Brockington’s attorney is Louis Pechman. Tuckner regularly appears on television as a talking head on harassment law.
{ 6 comments }
Further discussion of how lying about your past to avoid alienating a romantic partner could become a felony in Massachusetts if a state lawmaker has his way (Volokh, May 5; see Mar. 12). More: Greenfield (feminist law professors’ proposals).
{ 2 comments }
The Eleventh Circuit on Monday “held that Ingrid Reeves could proceed to trial with her hostile environment harassment claim — which is to say, that if the jury agrees with her on the facts, it’s entitled to award potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages — even though the case didn’t involve any sexual extortion, any offensive touching, any sexual propositions, or even any insults targeted to her personally. Rather, her complaints, as described by the Eleventh Circuit were chiefly related to “sexually crude language that offended her.” Among the sources of that offense, per the court opinion, was “a radio program that was played every morning on the stereo in the office”, per Eugene Volokh “a morning program on Birmingham’s 107.7 FM during 2002-03, according to one brief”. (May 2; title post borrowed from Bader). More: Fulton County Daily Report, Evil HR Lady (”And you wonder sometime why we HR types put a damper on the fun.”).
{ 5 comments }
Do as we say, not as we do?
Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann is leading a group of 18 state Attorneys General seeking a ruling in the U.S. Supreme Court that employees can not be retaliated against by their bosses for filing a sexual harassment complaint.
The case comes at an ironic moment for Dann, as his office is investigating claims by two 26-year-old women who work at the Attorney General’s office that they were sexually harassed on and off the job by their boss, Anthony Gutierrez, a close friend of Dann’s who shared a Columbus condominium with him.
(”Dann Defends Woman Amid Own Office’s Sexual Harassment Flap”, Fox8 Cleveland, Apr. 16; Mark Rollenhagen and Reginald Fields, “Employee in Ohio attorney general’s office files police report”, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Apr. 19). Amid talk of a cover-up, Dann has also denied a request from the Columbus Dispatch under the state’s public records law “to review three months’ worth of e-mail messages between him and his then-scheduler, Jessica Utovich,” both of whose names turn up as possible witnesses in colorful text messages offered as evidence in the claims. “Dann in the past has said e-mails are public records and also has sought troves of messages from public offices when he was a state senator and the Democratic candidate for Ohio’s top legal office.” (James Nash, “Dann won’t release e-mails”, DispatchPolitics (Columbus Dispatch), Apr. 13; Julie Carr Smyth, “Sexual complaint probe at top cop’s office intensifies”, AP/Akron Beacon Journal, Apr. 18; Mark Naymik, “Dann has habit of hiring his friends; some have proved to be embarrassments”, Openers (Cleveland Plain Dealer blog), Apr. 12; Reginald Fields, “Dann employee files complaint with police”, Openers, Apr. 18).
After initial resistance, Dann did release some information that raised reportorial eyebrows:
In a surprising reversal, Attorney General Marc Dann’s office released 12 pages of notes that detail allegations of repeated sexual harassment and possibly an attempt to destroy text messages that may document the incidents. …
Dann’s Equal Employment Opportunity officer, Angela Smedlund, interviewed Cindy Stankoski and Vanessa Stout on March 31 about problems they had had with their boss, Anthony Gutierrez, who is Dann’s friend and former roommate.
Smedlund’s notes reveal the following:
Stankoski agreed to go out for drinks with Gutierrez last Sept. 10, but said she soon “felt tipsy and trapped.” She agreed to go to an apartment Gutierrez shared with Dann and Communications Director Leo Jennings III. She called and text-messaged friends that night.
In the margin, Smedlund wrote: “Leo & Tony destroyed texts Tony admitted to Charlie.” The notes do not identify Charlie’s last name.
Jennings and Gutierrez are now both on paid administrative leave.
(Laura A. Bischoff, “Dann’s office unveils documents detailing harassment report”, Lebanon, Oh. Western-Star, Apr. 16; Rollenhagen/Fields, “Reports show Dann was aware of Gutierrez’s history of troubles”, Cleveland Plain Dealer/Youngstown Vindicator, Apr. 18; Bertram de Souza, “Will Dann survive the crisis?”, StirFry (Youngstown Vindicator), Apr. 17). Perhaps unfortunately in retrospect, the noisily anti-business Dann had been lionized in the New York Times after his election as a possible “next Eliot Spitzer“.
More: Above the Law, John Phillips (”Other key words are pajamas, condo, inappropriate text messages, Hawaiian pizza, booze, passing out in a bedroom, unbuttoned pants upon waking up, and nothing on but his underwear.”), Law and More. Update: Dann’s emails with scheduler released (Dispatch via Genova)
{ 1 comment }
Mark Steyn on the youngster charged with sexual harassment in suburban Washington, D.C.:
Randy Castro is in the first grade. But, at the ripe old age of 6, he’s been declared a sex offender by Potomac View Elementary School. He’s guilty of sexual harassment, and the incident report will remain on his record for the rest of his school days - and maybe beyond.Maybe it’ll be one of those things that just keeps turning up on background checks forever and ever: Perhaps 34-year-old Randy Castro will apply for a job, and at his prospective employer’s computer up will pop his sexual-harasser status yet again. Or maybe he’ll be able to keep it hushed up until he’s 57 and runs for governor of Virginia, and suddenly his political career self-detonates when the sordid details of his Spitzeresque sexual pathologies are revealed.
(”Attack of the preschool perverts”, syndicated/Orange County Register, Apr. 12; Brigid Schulte, “For Little Children, Grown-Up Labels As Sexual Harassers”, Washington Post, Apr. 3). A contrary view (letter to the editor from Cynthia Terrell of Takoma Park, Md., WaPo, Apr. 5): “The Post showed appalling insensitivity to the inappropriate nature of Randy Castro’s act. …our culture remains largely indifferent to privacy and harassment issues involving gender.”
{ 5 comments }
Proposed legislation establishing such an offense is arguably broad enough to cover such come-on lines as, “Single? Of course I am.” (Marc Randazza, Mar. 10, via Lat).
{ 8 comments }
Point of Law Volokh