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
“If I was as bad as they are making it out,” he added, “why would I have not come out of the trial in handcuffs, and held in contempt and sanctioned and found to have violated the defendants’ rights to a fair trial?”
I’d like to know that, too. How bad are these judges that they let an attorney get away with conduct that is potentially a disciplinary violation?
they seem to do that quite a bit too (every single jack thompson case)
I find it deeply troubling that a lawyer would advance a defense of, essentially, “I got away with it until now”. As if “failure to warn” was a defense in an ethics case involving a (theoretically) sophisticated defendant. Of course, when a West Virginia Supreme Court Justice can claim there is no appearance of impropriety while reducing the judment against a corporation responsible for the majority of his re-election campaign contributions, the standard for ethical conduct must be very low indeed.