Last week we honored Judge Samuel B. Kent with our prestigious Judge of the Day award, based on his alleged sexual harassment of a court employee. Now the Fifth Circuit Judicial Council has also recognized Judge Kent. From Texas Lawyer:
The Judicial Council of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals [on Friday] issued an order reprimanding and admonishing U.S. District Judge Samuel B. Kent of Galveston. The order relates to a complaint of judicial misconduct lodged against the judge on May 21 alleging sexual harassment toward an employee of the federal judicial system.
A former case manager for Kent, Cathy McBroom, confirms she filed a complaint against the judge. She declines further comment. McBroom currently works in the clerk’s office in the Houston Division of the Southern District of Texas.
You can access the order here (PDF). But as a tipster notes, “All the juicy stuff will ‘not be disclosed.’ No fun at all.”
Fear not, judicial gossip aficionados. The Houston Chronicle has more details:
Kent is accused of harassing and inappropriately touching his 49-year-old case manager in his chambers in March….
On the day of the incident, other employees saw McBroom crying and visibly upset, according to interviews. A few weeks later, McBroom transferred to another federal court job in Houston. McBroom was so shaken by the encounter, “She (was) a basket case,” an acquaintance said.
McBroom has retained Houston attorney Rusty Hardin, who would not comment for now on the particulars of the case.
Not good news for Judge Kent. Hardin is one of Houston’s top trial lawyers.
And this is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Additional allegations against Judge Kent, after the jump.
In the months before U.S. District Judge Samuel Kent was temporarily relieved of his duties, an employee of the court filed a sexual harassment complaint against him, sources have told The Daily News. The sources refused to be identified in speaking about a complaint that court officials have ordered to be kept confidential.
We were rightfully ribbed for having so few details in yesterday’s post about the O’Melveny Mystery Man (hereinafter “Mystery”). Now we have more information about him, gleaned from multiple sources.
One source, who interacted with Mystery at lunches and over coffee, said that he “seemed very quiet.” But maybe he acts differently in a party context (i.e., after he’s had a few drinks). A second source, who spent time with Mystery on the notorious night of the firm retreat, described him as “obnoxious” and “a true frat guy.”
As for the alleged conduct on the evening in question, here’s what we’ve heard:
1. “[O]ne of the summer associates is a lesbian, but I don’t think most of us knew until this weekend since she brought her girlfriend. Everyone was at the hospitality suite on Saturday night, and the summer kissed her girlfriend on the cheek. [Mystery] yells out, “Whoa, what was that?!” and makes a totally un-PC scene, [making] both girls uncomfortable.”
2. “[O]ne of the first year associates had her fiance there, and he was drinking white wine. [Mystery] says: ‘Why are you drinking white wine? Are you a fag?’
3. “[Mystery] kept doing the ‘wink and point’ thing at a 3rd or 4th year female associate, telling her that she would be his drinking buddy for the night. She was creeped out.”
No, that’s not all. More misconduct alleged, after the jump.
Last week we told you about a fellow at Katten Muchin Rosenman in Chicago, who managed to achieve the impossible feat: he got fired from a summer associate gig. This is even more impressive than merely getting “no-offered” at the end of the summer. We wrote:
1. A summer associate in the Chicago office of Katten was fired earlier this month (believed to be the week of July 9, 2007).
2. His employment was terminated because (a) he allegedly engaged in inappropriate sexual conduct with female summer associates, variously described as “repeatedly smack[ing] the asses of female summers” or “playing grab ass with female summers,” and (b) he allegedly made racially insensitive jokes, in front of multiple attorneys.
In the wake of this story, a reader sent us this message:
Apparently, the WSJ Law Blog “Rules of Etiquette” for summer associates need minor revision. Here are my suggested changes.
You can check out the new and improved etiquette handbook, after the jump.
Yesterday we wrote about a former summer associate in the Chicago office of Katten Muchin Rosenman. He was fired earlier this month, after he allegedly (1) made racially insensitive remarks and (2) engaged in inappropriate physical contact with female summer associates.
With respect to the first allegation, it’s claimed that he first made a racist comment to another summer associate. When she got angry, he supposedly told her he liked “angry black women.”
(Hmm… What’s he doing for the rest of the summer? We hear that Shanetta Cutlar is hiring.)
With respect to the second allegation, it’s claimed that the ex-SA “repeatedly smack[ed] the asses of female summers” or “play[ed] grab ass with female summers.” What was he thinking? This is obviously unacceptable.
(Silly summer. Ass-grabbing is for partners!)
Read the rest, after the jump.
Hey kids, guess what? It IS possible to get fired from your cushy summer associate gig!
You need to try hard — really hard. It’s even harder than passing the bar exam.
But it’s not impossible. This summer has already claimed at least one victim. Multiple sources advise that a summer associate in the Chicago office of Katten Muchin Rosenman was recently canned.
Read the dirty details, after the jump.
What do you get when you put the three smartest judges on the Seventh Circuit — Frank Easterbrook, Richard Posner, and Diane Wood — on the same panel?
In this case, something weird. Very weird. It’s amusing to imagine this trio of legal geniuses wrapping their minds around such a bizarre fact pattern. Questions Presented:
(1) How can you tell when a gay co-worker is cruising you at the urinals?
(2) Is he checking you out — or does he just have a lazy eye?
We have been pointed to an opinion from the District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in a sexual harassment case filed against the subject our earlier post, Douglas County District Attorney David McDade, back in 1999. (See Lewis et. al. v. McDade, 54 F.Supp.2d 1332 (1999)). The descriptions of the allegedly harassing behavior in the opinion are classic. Here a few choice samples:
Defendant McDade would tell a woman employee to walk down the hall so that he could watch her walk from behind.
On occasion, he made comments about Plaintiff Lewis’ legs and that her dress was a “turn-on.”
Defendant McDade also shot rubber bands at the breasts and buttocks of the female employees.
Defendant McDade lifted the suit jacket of Plaintiff Gerstenberger and looked and pointed at her buttocks.
On an occasion when a man was being prosecuted who had obtained a penile implant, Defendant McDade carried the implant around the office proclaiming he was larger than the implant.
For those too lazy to look up the citation, there are more samples after the jump.
As an aside, we also found this funny:
[As an initial matter, the Court denies Defendant McDade's Motion to Exceed Page Limit. Defendant McDade has had three prior opportunities to brief the issues in the motion for summary judgment. Defendant filed a brief of 50 pages in support of the motion for summary judgment [84-1], a brief of 25 pages in reply to Plaintiffs’ responsive brief [92-1], and a brief of 22 pages in support of his objections to the Report and Recommendation [109-1]. Defendant McDade now requests permission to file a 67 page brief in response to Plaintiffs’ objections to the Report and Recommendation [115-1]. A review of the proposed brief shows that substantial portions of it are simply restatements of arguments presented in prior briefs. It is the filing of briefs such as the one submitted by Defendant McDade which the Local Rule is intended to prevent. Therefore, Defendant McDade’s Motion to Exceed Page Limit [116-1] is DENIED. The Court will not consider the brief for purposes of this Order.
The evolution of relationships between the genders continues. Currently, in law firms, there is an interesting conundrum; balancing the desire for a gender-blind workplace where “the best lawyer gets the work and advances” and the reality of navigating the complicated maze created by the fact that, in general, men and women do possess differences in their work styles. These variations impact who they work with, how they work, how they build professional connections and how organizations ultimately leverage, reward and recognize the talents of all.
Henry Ford sat on his workbench and sighed. A year earlier, he had personally built 13,000 Model Ts with his own hands. Fashioning lugnuts and tie rods by hand, Ford was loath to ask for help. Sure, there were things about the car that he didn’t quite understand. This explains the lack of reliable navigation systems in the Model T. But Ford persevered because he knew that unless he did everything, he could not reliably call these cars his own.
“Unless my own personal toil is responsible for it, it may as well be called a Hyundai,” Ford remarked at the time.
The preceding may sound unfamiliar because it is categorically untrue. And also monumentally stupid. Henry Ford didn’t build all those cars by hand. He had help and plenty of it. Almost exactly one hundred years ago, Henry Ford opened up the most technologically advanced assembly line the world had ever seen. Built on the premise that work can be chopped up into digestible pieces and completed by many men better than one, the line ushered in an age of unparalleled productivity.
Today, an attorney refers business because he can’t do everything the client asks of him.
There are three reasons why this is way dumber than a made-up Henry Ford story…
Ed. note: The Asia Chronicles column is authored by Kinney Recruiting. Kinney has made more placements of U.S. associates, counsels and partners in Asia than any other recruiting firm in each of the past six years. You can reach them by email: [email protected].
Since late last year, things have been booming in Hong Kong / China in cap markets, especially Hong Kong IPOs. M&A deal flow has recently been getting a bit stronger as well. Although one can’t predict such things with any certainty, all signs are pointing to a banner entire 2014 for the top end US corporate and cap markets practices in Hong Kong / China. This is not really new news, as its been the feeling most in the market have had for a few months now and things continue to look good.
The head of our Asia practice, Evan Jowers, has been in Hong Kong for about 10 days a month (with trips every other month to both Shanghai and Bejing) for the past 7 months, and spending most of his time there meeting with senior US hiring partners at just about all the major US and UK firms there, as well as prospective candidates at all associate levels and partner levels, and when in the US, Evan works Asia hours and is regularly on the phone with such persons, as our the other members of our Asia team. Our Yuliya Vinokurova is in Hong Kong every other month and Robert is there about 5 times a year as well. While we have a solid Asia team of recruiters, Evan Jowers will spend at least some time with all of our candidates for Asia position. We have had long standing relationships, and good friendships in some cases, with hiring partners and other senior US partners in Asia for 8 years now.