Employment Lawyers Being Targeted by Phishers and Scammers
Plaintiffs employment lawyers beware. There is a new email scam targeting employment lawyers that is a variant on the old “Nigerian prince” scam.
June 21, 2018 at 01:15 PM
8 minute read
Plaintiffs employment lawyers beware. There is a new email scam targeting employment lawyers that is a variant on the old “Nigerian prince” scam. For those not familiar, the “Nigerian prince” scam goes something like this: the mark is contacted via email by someone claiming to represent a Nigerian prince in need of collecting or transferring some ridiculous amount of money in U.S. dollars. It just so happens that all the scammer needs is for the target, who is completely random and unaffiliated with the prince or his henchmen, to open a bank account and deposit their own money into the account. Then, once the target jumps through some additional hoops, he/she can withdraw the millions upon millions of dollars due the Nigerian prince and receive a cut of the money.
The variations on the scam can range from being an unsuspecting lottery winner to brokering a sales transaction on behalf of a foreign national. In almost every instance of the scam, there are scant details presented, spelling and grammatical errors, vague references to the law in “your jurisdiction” and so on. Scammers have gotten more sophisticated over the years and the scam eventually evolved into targeting lawyers. Seeking to capitalize on lawyers looking to make a quick buck, the scammers will typically ask for assistance with a business transaction such as the following email received by our office:
Name: Wah Teng Gan Email: [email protected] Subject: business transactions Message: Dear Counsel, I want to inquire if your firm can draft business agreement for sale transactions rather assist us in drafting sale transaction agreement or A referral will be welcome if this is not your area of practice.kindly advice regarding this issue as soon as possible. Yours Sincerely, Wah Teng Gan Edal Electronics Co., Ltd Room 911-914, Chevalier Commercial Centre 8 Wang Hoi Road, Kowloon Bay, KLN, Hong Kong Phone: 852 27598225 Fax 852-35518363 [email protected].
Sometimes the scam email is more simplistic, such as the following, also received just weeks apart from the foregoing scam: “I am writing to request your firm's service to prepare and negotiate a Sale Agreement. Thank you for your consideration of my request. Donald Voghel.” Or, there is the innocuous “debt” owed, such as this: “My name is Mr. Andy Liu. I am requesting your assistance in the litigation of a $555,000 debt owed to me by my late wife's brother, Mr. David Smith. I need a lawyer that will help me enforce the agreement we had, and force him to pay back what he owes me. Hope to hear from you soon. Thanks Andy Liu [email protected] +85258193860.” That phone number, has 11 digits, not 10.
Until recently, it has been easy for our firm to brush off these phishing and email scams. None of the requests were within our practice discipline and did not particularly interest our office. Couple that with the fact that they appeared to be fraudulent and a decision not to get involved was easy.
That said, the following email inquiry did get our attention:
Name: David Wang Email: [email protected] Subject: wrongfull termination Message: Hello, Urgent! I am seeking representation for wrongful dismissal and sexual harassment at my place of work. Please advise if you are able to take my case and schedule a time to discuss further.via e-mail id below [email protected] Thanks in anticipation of your assistance. David Wang.(Mr) e-mail id. [email protected]
On its face, this is the type of inquiry our office routinely handles and we will typically conduct an intake, including a phone consultation and possibly an in-person meeting. Upon further investigation, we learned that Wang reached out to another attorney just one day earlier. That attorney did a complete intake and learned that Wang believed he was the victim of sexual harassment by his female supervisor and was wrongfully fired from his very high paying job without any prior disciplinary record. Wang's story was replete with examples of unwanted sexual assault by his female supervisor including touching of his genitals, as well as a demand for settlement of $430,950. Wang was certain the company would settle with him immediately as soon as he secured an attorney. Wang was out of the country and unable to meet face to face because his late mother recently passed away in Canada and he was handling her business affairs. Again, all of the foregoing facts seemed plausible and well worth exploring.
As it turns out, Wang's issues were eerily similar to an intake done on a John Smith just a few weeks earlier. We knew that Wang's story sounded familiar, and once again, upon further investigation, learned that Smith, like Wang, presented the same facts: sexual harassment by female supervisor; unwanted touching of his genitals; wrongful termination with no prior discipline; and a demand for three year's salary, which also happened to be $430,950. One other clue that set off alarm bells, Smith was out of the country tending to his late mother's death in Canada. Something was “phishy.” After repeated attempts to get a hold of Wang and Smith, both men disappeared, never to be heard from again. We concluded then, as we do now, that this was a scam. Identical facts and identical stories, all the way down to the dollar amount sought and the dead mom in Canada.
Fortunately, our office did not take the bait. Other lawyers have not been so fortunate. The following story was shared by a fellow employment lawyer concerning a scammer using the name “Jeffrey Helman.” Helman's initial email goes as follows: Dear Attorney, I wish to request for legal representation in an unfair dismissal claim from my former employer. I will really be greatfull if your/your firm can assist me with this process. Jeffrey Helman
Helman's story is one where he claims he was sexually harassed by his female supervisor at Abbott, and then fired when he complained. This story has a similar ring to it. In the story relayed by the prominent and successful employment lawyer, Helman retained the lawyer's law firm to represent him in a miraculously fast and successful negotiation whereby the company increased their office from $3,000 to $97,000 as soon as he told the company that the law firm was going to represent him. After the settlement was reached, either Helman or a confederate masqueraded as Abbott's director of human resources, and sent by email a PDF titled, “Settlement Agreement and General Release.” The agreement had some of the usual elements in it, but also some unusual ones.
The idea of the scam is that the settlement check is then sent to the law firm where it was deposited into the trust account. Once the money becomes available, the firm takes its share and then mails Helman his share of the proceeds. Helman then cashes the check, flees the coop and is never heard from again. Meanwhile, the bank finds the original check is fraudulent, it withdraws money from the trust account to cover as much as possible of the withdrawals, and notifies the ethics authorities that the trust account is overdrawn. The firm and their clients, with funds in the trust account are left picking up the pieces.
Abbott's legal department is currently aware of the scam and have a staffer to answer calls about this scam from plaintiffs lawyers across the country. Apparently, the scammer is still reaching out to plaintiffs attorneys for representation. All of the frauds used the same name: Jeffrey Helman. The scams have been reported to—and are being investigated—by the FBI.
The threat of similar emails scams targeting employment lawyers is very real. In the John Smith example, above, the scammer even fabricated emails and documents to make it appear as realistic as possible. As attorneys, we have to be extra vigilant in how we approach these issues. There is a natural inclination to want to help purported victims of sexual assault. Any time a new case comes in we want to give the client the benefit of the doubt, especially when the facts are salacious. Be forewarned. Even for those of us who have malpractice insurance, some malpractice insurance carriers are excluding such events from their coverage, necessitating lawyers to secure cyberliability coverage and “social engineering” coverage.
Jeffrey Campolongo, founder of the Law Office of Jeffrey Campolongo, has been perfecting his brand of law for almost two decades, focusing on employment and entertainment matters.
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
© 2025 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 AllJudge Louis C. Bechtle: An American Jurist Who Relied on Common Sense, Sound Judgment and Fairness
5 minute readSix Ways Thought Leadership Can Support Your Law Firm’s 2025 Strategic Plan
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Many LA County Law Firms Remain Open, Mobilize to Support Affected Employees Amid Historic Firestorm
- 2Stevens & Lee Names New Delaware Shareholder
- 3U.S. Supreme Court Denies Trump Effort to Halt Sentencing
- 4From CLO to President: Kevin Boon Takes the Helm at Mysten Labs
- 5How Law Schools Fared on California's July 2024 Bar Exam
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