Sanctions Motions Fly After Plaintiff Lawyer Questioned Defendants as Blogger
"He's been dropped as a party. He's saying, 'They don't represent me.' From my standpoint under the rules, that fulfills my obligation," Ty Clevenger said.
August 21, 2019 at 03:04 PM
4 minute read
A Texas attorney, who also runs a law blog, is in a feud with opposing counsel after he submitted a public-records request to defendants without identifying himself as plaintiff counsel.
Ty Clevenger's request to defendants in a civil rights case between a Texas agency and state trooper angered opposing counsel, who want the court to punish him for allegedly contacting their clients without permission.
But now the two sides are trading sanctions motions.
Lawyers in the Texas Office of the Attorney General, representing the defendants, cast the first stone. They alleged attorney Ty Clevenger was breaking disciplinary rules by communicating with their clients, including a man who was initially a defendant in the case but was later dropped from the suit.
Clevenger is hitting back, alleging the government lawyers are the ones committing misconduct by claiming to still represent that ex-defendant.
"He's been dropped as a party. He's saying, 'They don't represent me,'" Clevenger said. "From my standpoint under the rules, that fulfills my obligation."
The underlying case is Spears v. McCraw, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.
In it, Clevenger represents Billy Spears, a trooper with the Texas Department of Public Safety's Texas Highway Patrol. His client brought a civil rights action against 18 defendants but later dropped former agency Inspector General Capt. Louis Sanchez as a defendant.
The remaining defendants asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing they have qualified immunity. Finding that Spears had failed to plead important aspects of his claims, U.S. Magistrate Judge Andrew Austin found for the defendants and recommended complete dismissal. The district court has not yet decided on the recommendation.
Meanwhile, court records show a feud among lawyers in the litigation.
Rights as attorney-blogger?
The behind-the-scenes fighting between plaintiffs and defendants' counsel has happened through email so far but came to the forefront when the assistant attorneys general in the case on Aug. 8 asked the court to sanction and disqualify Clevenger.
"Despite repeated requests by defense counsel to cease communication with their clients, Mr. Clevenger responded that he is entitled to communicate with represented persons under his First Amendment right as a 'blogger,' and refused to provide information regarding this continued contact," the defendants' motion read. "Mr. Clevenger's rights as a blogger, however, do not override his ethical duties as a lawyer."
|Click here to read the exhibits outlining the email exchange
The motion claims Clevenger emailed some defendants, saying he was a blogger requesting information and omitting that he represented a plaintiff who was suing them. Clevenger has said that he communicated with Sanchez, the dropped defendant, whom the attorney general's office still represent, the motion said.
Hitting back with a plaintiff's motion for sanctions on Aug. 20, Clevenger argued that it's "a fraud on the court" to say he communicated with Sanchez while the attorney general's office represented him. The motion claimed that Sanchez's representation terminated before Clevenger communicated with him. Clevenger claimed that he agreed to stop contacting other defendants but that Sanchez emailed him in May to say he didn't want an assistant attorney general to represent him.
Clevenger, who's licensed and practices in Texas but lives in Brooklyn, is a well-known lawyer-muckraker who writes a blog about public corruption. Although federal judges have sanctioned him multiple times and he's faced discipline from the State Bar of Texas for attorney misconduct, he also has the reputation of exposing real public corruption in the Lone Star State and bringing down serious consequences. He won the ouster of a federal district judge after revealing a sexual harassment scandal and sparked an indictment against Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for three felony securities fraud charges. Paxton has pleaded not guilty to those pending charges.
"The more this drags out, the more this looks like political retaliation because of my role in getting Ken Paxton indicted," Clevenger said. "I do intend to ask everyone involved to be compelled to show up at a hearing, and if Ken Paxton is involved, I'm going to ask the court to order him to be there."
|Read the defendants' motion for sanctions:
|Read the plaintiff's motion for sanctions:
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 AllAre Associate Sign-On Bonuses Back? Not Just Yet, Recruiters Say
Midsize Texas Firm Kane Russell Takes Another Step Toward Second-Generation Leadership With New CFO
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