Lawyer of the Day Last Week: Seeking a Sexy Secretary
Ed. note: We gave this a shout-out last week in non-sequiturs (second item), but it’s egregious enough to merit more discussion.
Biglaw attorneys frequently complain about how hard it is to date given the amount of hours they devote to work. Attorneys at a small immigration firm in Chicago may have encountered a similar dilemma.
Perhaps inspired by Maggie Gyllenhaal’s cinematic portrayal of a sex-enjoying legal secretary, Samir Zia Chowhan of Chowhan Law allegedly advertised on Craigslist, in the “Adult Gigs” section, for a secretary with benefits. From Legal Profession Blog:
Loop law firm looking to hire am [sic] energetic woman for their open secretary/legal assistant position. Duties will include general secretarial work, some paralegal work and additional duties for two lawyers in the firm. No experience required, training will be provided. Generous annual salary and benefits will be provided, including medical, dental, life, disability, 401(k) etc. If interested, please send current resume and a few pictures along with a description of your physical features, including measurements. We look forward to meeting you.
Many of you will recall that Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan waged a war against Craigslist’s “Erotic Services” section earlier this year, claiming that there was rampant prostitution there. By her doing, the section was taken down and replaced by this “Adult Gigs” section, which is supposedly more closely monitored for illegal activity. But in our surfing of the section, we saw quite a few ads like Chowhan’s, including ones like this: “I’m seeking a young lady who would like to have some fun with me, possibly on a regular basis, in exchange for some help with bills or whatever.”
At least Chowhan was a little more discreet in his May 2009 ad. But when one woman responded, he made it clear why he had listed the job in the Adult Gigs section.
He defines “additional duties,” after the jump.
The correspondence was made public when a complaint was filed against Chowhan last week, both for the ad and for neglect and misrepresentation in two immigration cases. According to the complaint, Chowhan wrote to the woman who applied for the position:
As this is posted in the “adult gigs” section, in addition to the legal work, you would be required to have sexual interaction with me and my partner, sometimes together sometimes separate. This part of the job would require sexy dressing and flirtatious interaction with me and my partner, as well as sexual interaction. You will have to be comfortable doing this with us.
Since that’s part of the job, that should be part of the interview process, obviously:
Lastly, we’ve actually hired a couple of girls in the past for this position. But they have not been able to handle the sexual aspect of the job later. We have to be sure you’re comfortable with that aspect, because I don’t want you to do anything that you’re not comfortable with. So since that time, we’ve decided that as part of the interview process you’ll be required to perform for us sexually (i didn’t do this before with the other girls i hired, now i think i have to because they couldn’t handle it). Because that aspect is an integral part of the job, I think it’s necessary to see if you can do that, because it’ll predict future behavior of you being able to handle it when you have the job.
Now that Chowhan has informed the applicant that the job involves handling pressure and relieving pressure, he’s ready to give her a test run:
The next step is to set up an interview. When are you available to interview? I am free to interview today. Please let me know what your availability is.
It’s hard out there for legal support staff these days. We wrote in March about the layoffs hitting their ranks hard — see Support Staff Taking it on the Chin. With jobs like this, they’re being asked to take “it” in places beyond the chin.
It’s not a completely wild idea. Laid-off lawyer Deidre Dare, formerly of Allen & Overy’s Moscow office, has floated prostitution as a potential income stream. But in his letter to the applicant, Chowhan said this job would pay between $50,000 and $75,000. If you’re being asked to prostitute yourself along with secretarial duties, shouldn’t that come with six-figures attached?
In re Samir Zia Chowhan [Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission]
“Adult Gig” Craigslist Post Leads To False Statement Charges [Legal Profession Blog via Legal Blog Watch]
Attorney may face disciplinary action over ad seeking secretary on Craigslist [Chicago Tribune]
Earlier: Craigslist Relents: No More ‘Erotic Services’
Support Staff Taking it on the Chin
Deidre Dare Proposes Prostitution as a Layoff Solution?
(75) Comments
Comments
First to say there's nothing wrong with this.
WHAT'S UP MOTHERFUCKERS???!
What gets me is that there are no disciplinary charges being brought against him for soliciting a prostitute-secretary.... it looks like he is only be charged with unrelated malpractice and with lying about the craigslist ad.
this is so outrageous it must be a joke. if somehow it isn't, they ought to be disbarred immediately. actually, disbar them either way since apparently their practice is shit just like they are.
4 = UGLY ASS HO!
Cooked.
3 = U.C. Hastings level of reading comprehension.
5 = loser who has to pay for it
The ad did not address ass pounding = TTT.
8 = guy who gets ass-fucked for free and considers that getting laid.
11 = super cool guy
I'm going out on a limb here and saying that time isn't why these guys can't get laid. Any pics of these lawyers?
"He has degrees from Chicago-Kent College of Law, J.D., 2000 and Indiana University (Bloomington, Indiana) B.A., Economics and Philosophy, 1997."
I guess they don't teach ethics, employment law, or common sense at Chicago-Kent.
Immigration law. Typical.
7 = U.C. Hastings reading and comprehension level. All the charges in the last count relate to lying, not the preceding conduct:
It alleges that by lying initially to the ARDC about posting the ad Chowhan violated Rule 8.1 (a)(1) and Rule 8.4(a)(4) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct and Illinois Supreme Court Rule 770. They respectively prohibit making a false statement of material fact in connection with a lawyer disciplinary matter; conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and conduct which tends to defeat the administration of justice or bring the courts or legal profession into disrepute.
It would probably be easier to go after a private school that pulls the same shenanigans-- no need to have the hassle of dealing with the all the resources of California. And screw actually winning, just discovery on how employment statistics are drawn up would be worth it.
Wrong thread, 16.
this is change we can believe in
3, 15 credited. 7, isn't it embarrassing when you make a snide, holier than thou criticism of another commenter's qualifications only to find that you're the one who erred?
Anyway, why aren't there charges being brought for the solicitation and sexual harassment??? I guess they have enough to sink him as is, but why not throw the big one in too?
The amazing thing is that between TWO attorneys, the thought never crossed their mind that this was a bad idea.
In the grand scheme of law firm life, this is a story of minimal interest. That it gets repeated strongly points to Kash being paid by the post.
20, two IMMIGRATION attorneys... so expectations should be pretty low.
Here's a pic:
http://www.hi5.com/friend/p106690793--Samir_Chowhan--html
buy Samir a digital camcorder:
http://www.amazon.com/Samir-Z-Chowhan/wishlist/2NZJ24EZ31FNB/ref=cm_pdp_wish_all_itms
And to you, Samir Zia Chowen, I'll see you again you know where.
And to you, Samir Zia Chowhan, I'll see you again you know where.
Samir Z. Chowhan (s...@umcc.umcc.umich.edu) wrote:
Do you enjoy a warm wet mouth sucking your cock dry? 23 year old male willing to service any male who enjoys hot blowjobs. I'm located in Chicago and you would have to cum to me to get your cock sucked. If you're interested e-mail me at s...@umich.edu You and your cock will enjoy the pleasures to cum.
I accidentally gave the wrong address, mail me at s...@umcc.umich.edu if you want your cock sucked dry.
from: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.personals/browse_thread/thread/df775daf1633ff9b/8d1176d1aa33466f#8d1176d1aa33466f
ALL SEXUAL adventurism aside, everyone at this firm should be immediately disbarred for working to keep foreign law-breakers in our country.
Newsgroups: alt.sex.homosexual
From: s...@umcc.umcc.umich.edu (Samir Z. Chowhan)
Date: 1996/09/17
Subject: m iso gm in Bloomington for fun
I'm a 22 yo male in Bloomington. I'm looking for another male to have sex with. I would like to get together three or four times a week for sex. The sex i have in mind is oral sex, i would like to recieve oral sex and am very good at giving it too. E-mail me if you want to get together.
from: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sex.homosexual/browse_thread/thread/8feaa66236c3398e/3b8af2401f9ae2ac#3b8af2401f9ae2ac
OH, SHIT, #27.... That's definitely him. His profile above says he's currently 35, and in that gay post he says he's 23... which matches up to the date: 1997.
So I guess male secretaries can also apply?
Elie couldn't post anything on ATL this weekend because he was too busy motorbiking around town:
http://www.collegehumor.com/picture:1922170
Holy shit, good work 27/29. May I nominate you for new EIC of ATL?
Kash - did you apply for his position?
33, with the new information from 27/29, maybe Elie and Lat should apply instead.
I think New Schtick Magnet needs to adapt his shtick semi-regularly. For example, today you could change your profile pic to Samir's and then go around to every thread and offer to suck people off. That would be funny as hell.
First to say that I would like to plow Maggie Gyllenhaal.
It's PUSSY FART time; bitches - let 'em RIP!!
I really don't believe there is anything to be said here. There is NOTHING wrong with what was posted by Samir. Anyone who thinks otherwise is 1) a woman or 2) a woman.
That is all.
38 applied for job and was REJECTED! Measurements not good enough for Samir to pay for!
1. If my understanding is correct, this kind of job is perfectly legal in Nevada outside of Las Vegas and they could have resolved all difficulties by simply relocating.
2. In most other places, they could have simply stipulated that it would all be recorded and put on a website. Getting paid to have recorded sex is generally legal, while just getting paid to have sex is generally not (which, by the way, is kind of odd).
I'm sure there's an ex porn star somewhere who'd be happy to do the sexual side of things and would be a pretty decent secretary as well.
27/29 - Great detective work!
27/29, very impressive work. I didn't even see those results in Google.
Samir Naga... Naga... Naga... Not gonna work here anymore, anyway.
But Samir does.
damn... internet footprint's a bitch, huh?
I'll give you a Samir Chowhan alright
You all did see what happens when you google "above the law" right? You have the option to click on "anal sex/butt sex" to jump to that part of this website. Classy.
Can anyone confirm/deny if the offer is still on the table? I shot Mr. Chowhan an e-mail, but no response.
Lawyers, prostitutes - whats the difference? They should have just advertised for an associate in a personable firm.
As long as she's an adult and consents, what's wrong with it?
dignity, ethics, harrumph, harrumph
Either you believe women get to choose how they use their bodies, or you don't. Freely choosing to accept money to let someone use your muscles, brain, sperm, and eggs are all OK. It's time we let people consensually sell sex. It's pathetic that we waste time on this stuff.
Chowhan Law to 190k?!?
48 - you didn't get a response b/c you're motherfucking fugly.
I live in Colorado and my girlfriend is rock hard !
Where's the Russian Bear ?
This law firm had a good idea, but it was very poorly executed. I hear that Brooke Hundley is available, perhaps they should try her instead.
52, women can freely choose how to use their bodies within the limits of the law. We put limits on how people use their bodies all the time. We don't allow just anyone to test pharma on people, we don't allow trafficking in human organs, and we don't let people sell sex for money. It is a public health and decency concern. I also take issue with the assumption that only women can be prostitutes. Prostitution is illegal regardless of who is selling and who is buying.
I once had a lovely male assistant who fulfilled these roles for me. Yum yum.
47 - Wow. I never saw that before. What the f is the deal with that. I was afraid to click on it...
In our band, David once had a "secretary" like this. Oh, she wasn't called a secretary, but that's really what she was. David was very confused and thought she was a muse and spiritual advisor.
I thought this was a joke, like the story was that he had been pranked. But it seems real; he is not claiming it wasn't him or that the reply email wasn't his. Ummmm.....this guy's gotta be dumber than a Ivy grad.
Working at a sex firm
Trying to raise my billables
Getting out my Facebook
Poking your profile
Sex firm woman, you'll be my hired hand
Sex firm woman, I'll let my offer stand
Sex firm woman, don't you hear my Bates stamper stamping?
12- judging by the name, I am guessing this dude resembles that insider trading dude from silicon valley. Should have just ordered a bride from India.
64 here. Read the rest of the comments. Is confirmed he is butt-ugly. But should order groom from India. My bad.
The fact that this is illegal shows just how puritanical and idiotic this country is, the so called "left wing" here is even worse than the right in its abject intellectual dishonesty.
Prostitution should not be illegal, it's going to happen anyway and we should focus on harm reduction like they have in more enlightened countries where the left is at least a little more honest (as opposed to here in the U.S., where our incarceration rate is the highest in the developed world). The women here who want it to remain illegal want that for reasons having NOTHING to do with health or "decency" (laughable), but for the same reason they always have, so that they can use sex to control men.
I had an affair with my paralegal for a while. The difference was I wasn't stupid enough to condition employment on it - nor advertise in craigslist.
#67 - We want details!
No pics of this guy on the firm website (which is very low budget).
The pro-prostitution people posting here are incompetent lawyers. Setting aside whether prostitution wrong, requiring sex from an employee is wrong because it creates a coercive situation.
I know you're idiots, so I'm going to have to spell it out for you. Imagine that there's a poor economy and high unemployment and foreclosure rates (I know that's a stretch). Now, imagine that it's considered legal/ethical to require sex from employees, and that practice is widespread. Many people would be forced into sex-slave jobs, just to get *any* job, even though they don't really consent to sex. Even if they do consent to sex at first, they would be unable to change their minds because they would fear losing their jobs. This is the same reasoning behind sexual harassment laws.
Just in case you're thinking, "So??":
Now, imagine that YOU are one of the people who needs a job. There are no jobs out there - you've been looking for a year. You finally find one, but you'd be forced to have sex with the partners. Financially, you have no choice but to take the job. You do, hoping for the best. You're a straight man, but the partners aren't (and they're male). You are raped and beaten repeatedly every day. But, there's nothing you can do - this is legal (you consented), and you can't afford to lose this job.
Consent isn't enough if coercion is involved. This is why prostitution isn't just about puritanical values. (How many prostitutes really want to be prostitutes? I'm sure some do, but not all. It's the latter that the law ought to protect.)
70 here -
Oops, meant to say in the last paragraph, "This is why opposition to prostitution isn't just about puritanical values."
70/71 wins the thread.
70-71,
Take Lochner and shove it up your ass. No one makes you take any job.
73, surely you don't mean Lochner v. New York (if you do, you need to re-read it, because Lochner is about police powers and due process, not whatever you seem to think it means)...
> No one makes you take any job.
No one makes you stay in a workplace where sexual harassment exists, either. But, it's still illegal because when it wasn't, coercive workplaces were ubiquitous. When it's ubiquitious, it means you can't take any job if you want to avoid the harassment because it will exist in all of the jobs. If, because of your finances, you have no choice but to take a job, then you have no choice but to submit to harassment...unless the law protects you from it.
I thought Lochner was about curbing the power of the federal government (albeit in the context of police powers and due process), which it did until everyone realized that so severely restricting the power kind of sucks. It leads to a race to the bottom on all sorts of horrible things like child labor, sexual harassment, discrimination, etc. So the Supreme Court reversed course with Wickard and the commerce clause loophole. Although premised on different powers, it still effectively reversed the Lochner era.
-not 70/71 or 73