Ex-Partners in Sex Bias Suit Can Review Chadbourne Leaders' Personal Emails
Resolving a discovery dispute in a $100 million gender discrimination case against Chadbourne & Parke, a magistrate judge allowed review of certain firm leaders' personal email accounts.
November 09, 2017 at 03:26 PM
3 minute read
A federal magistrate judge ruled Thursday that Chadbourne & Parke leaders who are named as defendants in a $100 million gender bias suit against the now-defunct firm must search their personal email accounts for potentially relevant documents that would be subject to review by the plaintiffs.
Ruling from the bench in Manhattan federal court, U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses sided with lawyers for former Chadbourne partners Kerrie Campbell, Mary Yelenick and Jaroslawa Zelinsky Johnson in a discovery dispute over the personal email accounts of several members of Chadbourne's leadership. A Sanford Heisler Sharp team led by David Sanford represents the women in the case, which alleges that Chadbourne paid women partners less and offered them fewer business development opportunities than their male counterparts.
The ruling comes as the former partners and Chadbourne, now part of Norton Rose Fulbright, remain in the midst of limited discovery related to the women's employment status at Chadbourne. The two sides were ordered to search for documents that could help determine whether the three women qualify for protection under federal employment laws, or if their former partner roles make them business owners who fall outside the scope of those protections.
Lawyers for Chadbourne, led by Kathleen McKenna of Proskauer Rose, argued that there was no need to look through the personal email accounts because none of the individual defendants—firm leaders and management committee members Abbe Lowell, Marc Alpert, Andrew Giaccia, Howard Seife, Lawrence Rosenberg and Paul Weber—conducted firm business on those accounts.
On the opposing side, the women partners' legal team at Sanford Heisler noted that the plaintiffs were already being required to look through their own personal email accounts and argued that the defendants should have to do the same.
Moses, who's overseeing discovery issues while U.S. District Judge Paul Oetken is hearing the case, said in court Thursday that both sides should have to look through personal email accounts for relevant evidence, similar to what they're doing for emails in the firm's account.
“My inclination is to say what's good for the goose is good for the gander here,” said Moses. She later added, “Search the personal accounts.”
Although she ruled in their favor on the personal email issue, the magistrate judge also shot down another request by the women suing Chadbourne. Their lawyers had sought emails from three additional former Chadbourne partners that may have addressed the level of control that the firm's management committee exerted over the firm and its partners.
On that request, Moses said she wasn't convinced that those three former partners would have any emails that weren't already included in documents from the management committee that Chadbourne has previously agreed to turn over. In light of that conclusion, the judge denied the request for now.
With her decision, Moses put to rest the latest in a set of thorny discovery issues that have arisen in the case. In October, she resolved a dispute over whether Chadbourne had done enough to disclose which partners were paid under individual guarantees and the dollar value of profits distributed to partners.
The Chadbourne case is one of a group of gender discrimination lawsuits currently targeting large law firms.
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 AllFired Kirkland Associate's Gender Bias Lawsuit to Enter Private Mediation
Epstein Becker Green Expands in Portland With Lane Powell Trio
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4Trump Files $10B Suit Against CBS in Amarillo Federal Court
- 5Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
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