'Knock It Off': Judge Scolds Reed Smith Partner Litigating Mueller Case
Reed Smith partner Eric Dubelier, who represents Concord Management and Consulting, raised the prospect that he might no longer represent the company, given the judge's remarks.
January 07, 2019 at 01:18 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on National Law Journal
A federal judge in Washington on Monday sharply rebuked the attorney representing a Russian company fighting charges in a case brought by special counsel Robert Mueller III, raising uncertainty about whether the lawyer will continue to represent the company.
U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich of the District of Columbia upbraided Reed Smith partner Eric Dubelier, who represents Concord Management and Consulting, over what she described as “personal attacks” on the special counsel and federal prosecutors in recent filings. Pointing to his latest brief to the court, which included a reference to the 1978 movie “Animal House,” Friedrich described his comments as “unprofessional, inappropriate, and ineffective.”
Friedrich repeated that Dubelier's strategy—including using references to comedy movies— was “ineffective,” and sternly told him it was “undermining your credibility in this courthouse.”
“Knock it off,” Friedrich, an appointee of President Donald Trump, said.
Dubelier, in a tense exchange moments later, raised the prospect that he might no longer represent the company, given the judge's remarks. He told the judge he would need to speak to his client about those comments, which he described as personal attacks, and determine whether it made sense for him to continue representing the firm.
He angrily asserted that there had been “bias on the part of the court here.”
“There's no bias,” Friedrich responded, again telling Dubelier there had been “many inappropriate remarks” in his filings to the court. “You know it,” she said.
“That's your opinion,” Dubelier shot back, saying he was “entitled” to discuss it with his client. On that, the judge agreed.
The heated exchange came during a status hearing in the case, amid a fight in court papers between Concord Management and government prosecutors over discovery. Part of the dispute relates to whether Dubelier should be permitted to share some of the discovery that the government deems “sensitive” with Concord Management.
Concord Management is so far the only Russian defendant to answer to charges brought by the special counsel's office in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The firm has aggressively fought the special counsel and other federal prosecutors at every turn in the case, including by deploying colorful language and movie references in court papers.
In a Jan. 4 brief, seeking to compel discovery from the government, he likened an argument made by Mueller's office to a quote from the 1978 film, “Animal House.” Shortly after that filing, Friedrich announced a status conference hearing would take place.
After Monday's exchange between Friedrich and Dubelier, the judge sealed the courtroom to discuss another grand jury-related matter in the case.
At the hearing were prosecutors from the special counsel's office and the Justice Department's National Security Division and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C.
Dubelier, who was joined Monday by Reed Smith lawyer Katherine Seikaly, declined to comment after the proceeding.
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 AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Litigators of the Week: A Win for Homeless Veterans On the VA's West LA Campus
'The Most Peculiar Federal Court in the Country' Comes to Berkeley Law
The New Federal Sentencing Factor in Downstate New York? Prison Conditions
Trending Stories
- 1Recent Decisions Regarding the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
- 2The Tech Built by Law Firms in 2024
- 3Distressed M&A: Mass Torts, Bankruptcy and Furthering the Search for Consensus: Another Purdue Decision
- 4For Safer Traffic Stops, Replace Paper Documents With ‘Contactless’ Tech
- 5As Second Trump Administration Approaches, Businesses Brace for Sweeping Changes to Immigration Policy
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