We’ve previously written about Sullivan & Cromwell’s so-called mailroom of death. To make a long story short (see our previous coverage here, here, and here for the full background), a Biglaw mailroom mixup caused Cory Maples, a Alabama death-row inmate, to miss a deadline for filing an appeal. The Supreme Court intervened, and ruled that in light of a “perfect storm of misfortune,” Maples would not be barred from appealing his conviction because of S&C’s epic screw-up.
Of particular note, however, is the fact that this pro bono debacle came about thanks to the apparent forgetfulness of Jaasi Munanka and Clara Ingen-Housz, two former SullCrom associates. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg pointed this out in her majority opinion (PDF), stating that “[w]hen the associates left Sullivan & Cromwell, they never notified Maples and didn’t seek leave to withdraw.” Because when you effectively abandon a client, SCOTUS is sure to call you out for doing so.
Both Munanka and Ingen-Housz have since moved onwards and upwards. Munanka is now a partner at Hogan Lovells in Denver, and last we heard of Ingen-Housz, she was an associate at Baker & McKenzie. But as always, our tipsters have been keeping a watchful eye on the situation, and now we’ve got some news about Ingen-Housz’s employment situation….
It seems that Ingen-Housz has been promoted to partner at Baker & McKenzie. The Global Competition Review (sub. req.) has the scoop:
Baker & McKenzie has promoted antitrust specialist Clara Ingen-Housz . . . to partner in its Hong Kong . . . office.
Ingen-Housz, 37, previously worked at Sullivan & Cromwell and Simpson Thacher & Bartlett in New York before joining Baker & McKenzie in Asia. Earlier in her career she was a member of the competition team at the European Commission’s legal service in Brussels.
“I am personally very happy to have been promoted,” says Ingen-Housz.
Of course Ingen-Housz is “very happy” about her promotion — not only will she now be able to roll around in a pile of money like Demi Moore in Indecent Proposal, but she’ll also get a go at putting her past behind her. After all, every accolade Ingen-Housz accumulates is just another chance for her to wipe her résumé and digital footprint clean of the SullCrom screw-up that could have cost a man his life.
Here’s something to ponder while you take a look at Ingen-Housz’s Baker & McKenzie bio on the next page: as a tipster so eloquently noted, “Wonder what SCOTUS would think of Baker’s standards for promotion?”