Chief Judge Rejects Intervention Request From Defense in College Admissions Cases
The chief federal judge in Massachusetts said defense attorneys must address their concerns of judge-shopping with Judge Gorton, who has been assigned the cases of many indicted parents.
April 11, 2019 at 03:42 PM
3 minute read
After defense attorneys in the college admission cases accused Boston prosecutors of “judge-shopping,” the chief federal judge in Massachusetts on Thursday rejected the defense attorneys' request to intervene.
Defense lawyers for parents, of whom 16 were indicted Tuesday on charges of money laundering and fraud conspiracy, told U.S. District Chief Judge Patti Saris earlier this week that the U.S. attorney for the District of Massachusetts was trying to get around court rules. Andrew Lelling, the U.S. attorney in Boston, denied the accusation and said it was the defense that sought to bend the rules for its benefit.
The defense team said that by issuing a superseding indictment in the case of a parent whose case had already been assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel Gorton, prosecutors avoided the random judge-assignment process that is supposed to occur with new cases. But Lelling wrote that a superseding indictment to add co-conspirators was “routine.”
In a one-page letter Thursday to defense lawyers, Saris said her court was committed to ensuring “integrity and fairness” in the case-assignment process. But she indicated that she would not step into the fray.
“Your claim that the defendants have been improperly joined must be addressed to the presiding judge,” Saris wrote, referring to Gorton. “If he severs any defendant(s), the presiding judge has the authority to return the indictment of that defendant for random re-assignment.”
In their letter to Saris on Tuesday, the defense lawyers said they had no problem with Gorton. But Lelling, in his letter to Saris on the same day, said the defense attorneys likely wanted a different judge because they believe Gorton imposes longer sentences compared with others in the district.
Harvey Silverglate, a Boston defense lawyer known for his civil liberties work who is not involved with the case, told ALM in an email that Gorton is regarded as “a pro-prosecution judge and a tough sentencer.”
Silverglate, of counsel at Zalkind Duncan & Bernstein, said because “Gorton is so tough and pro-prosecution,” he believes the judge is unlikely to rule that the newly added defendants be re-indicted and their cases re-assigned by random selection. “This is probably why the lawyers have complained not to Gorton (deaf ears) but rather to the chief judge,” Silverglate said.
Defense attorneys who signed the letter to Saris include those from Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo; Bienert Katzman; Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe; Keller/Anderle; Ropes & Gray; Nixon Peabody; White & Case; Nutter McClennen & Fish; Todd & Weld; Miner Orkand Siddall; Boies Schiller Flexner; Duane Morris; and the solo practitioner Martin Weinberg.
Arraignment dates have not been scheduled for the indicted parents.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDechert Partners With Wharton School for Associate-Level Business Training Program
Law Firms Are Turning to Online Training Platforms as Apprenticeship Model Falters
K&L Gates Partners With AltaClaro to Offer Gen AI Supervisory Course for Firm Partners and Managers
6 minute readNorton Rose Fulbright's New Houston Office Features Views of Urban Park
3 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250