The BLT: The Blog of Legal Times

Judge Sentences Longtime D.C. Defense Lawyer to 63 Months in Prison

Updated 5:58 p.m.

Calling a defense lawyer's crime "truly unconscionable," a federal judge in Washington today sentenced a longtime Washington attorney to more than five years in prison for his role in a scheme to manufacture evidence to dupe jurors in a drug trial.

The defense lawyer, Charles Daum, who had practiced law in the District of Columbia for three decades, will serve 63 months behind bars for a plot that included staged photographs and perjured testimony.

Daum was convicted at a bench trial last year that featured a series of jail recordings and testimony from cooperators—including Daum's client, whom the defense lawyer blamed for creating and executing the plot. Daum was indicted in 2011.

U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler today called Daum's scheme "shocking" and said it threatened public confidence in the integrity of the judicial system. Kessler said her sentencing decision should serve as a deterrent for any lawyer "who may think of cutting a corner, not telling quite the truth to a judge."

Convicted Lobbyist Asks Full D.C. Circuit to Review Prosecution

Earlier this year, in upholding the conviction of prominent former lobbyist Kevin Ring, a federal appeals court in Washington called the distinction between legal lobbying and criminal conduct "subtle." The court went on to say that the line "spells the difference between honest politics and criminal corruption."

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit that heard Ring's case was unanimous in its late January ruling in the high-profile prosecution, which flowed from the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal in Washington. Still, the judges said "this case is nothing if not close."

Ring's lawyers at Miller & Chevalier on Monday asked the full D.C. Circuit to review the panel decision, arguing that the ruling conflicts with U.S. Supreme Court precedent and decisions in other federal appellate courts. Ring's petition is here.

Miller white-collar defense partners Timothy O'Toole and Andrew Wise said the panel opinion incorrectly resolved two issues of "exceptional importance"—the role of campaign contributions in an honest services case and whether such a prosecution requires proof of a bribery agreement.

Dispute Over Smith Currie Ex-Partners' Funds Goes to Arbitration

A Washington federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Smith, Currie & Hancock over the return of ex-partner capital contributions, instead granting the firm's motion to compel arbitration.

The former partners, Dick Haire and Reginald Jones, along with other members of Atlanta-based Smith Currie's small Washington office, left the firm for Fox Rothschild in August 2011. Besides hiring Smith Currie attorneys and staff, Fox Rothschild also took over the lease of its Washington office.

Haire and Jones, in a complaint filed last April, said that they left Smith Currie over concerns about their compensation. The two claimed that after they left, the firm wrongly refused to return their capital contributions; Haire said he paid $49,981 into his capital account and Jones said he paid $65,852.

Prosecutors Recommend 78-month Prison Sentence for D.C. Defense Lawyer

Calling him the mastermind of a conspiracy to manufacture trial evidence in a drug case, federal prosecutors in Washington are recommending a longtime defense lawyer here spend more than six years in prison.

The attorney, Charles Daum, was convicted after a six-week bench trial in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia last summer on charges that included obstruction of justice. Daum, 66, had been a member of the D.C. bar for more than three decades. He is no longer practicing.

Prosecutors said Daum, with the help of two private investigators, participated in an elaborate scheme to dupe jurors into believing that drugs belonged to the brother of a client. At trial in 2008, the jury in the case against Daum's client, Delante White, failed to agree on a verdict. Prosecutors, relying on the cooperation of White and others, later determined the trial photos were staged.

"There are few things that are more an affront to the court and the justice system than a willful attempt to subvert that system, particularly when it is masterminded by a member of the court's own bar," Darrin McCullough, a U.S. Justice Department narcotics section trial attorney, said in a sentencing memo.

States, Private Plaintiffs Press Suit Against Wall Street Reform Law

Updated 10:09 a.m.

The plaintiffs that are challenging the constitutionality of the Wall Street reform law and the leadership of the Obama administration's new consumer protection agency are fighting to keep alive a suit in Washington federal district court.

The private plaintiffs, including the advocacy group Competitive Enterprise Institute and Texas-based State National Bank of Big Spring, late Wednesday responded to the U.S. Justice Department's effort to end the litigation. The eleven states that have joined the suit include Texas, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Michigan, Oklahoma and Ohio. (The states' response is here.)

The attorneys for the private plaintiffs, including O'Melveny & Myers partner Gregory Jacob and C. Boyden Gray, said in their court papers that the plaintiffs have presented sufficient evidence that the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act gave "unchecked and unprecedented powers" to federal agencies, including the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

"[T]he government has manufactured a jurisdictional challenge by mischaracterizing, fabricating and ignoring" the plaintiffs' evidence, the lawyers for the private plaintiffs said in their response to DOJ's insistence the suit should be thrown out. The states that joined the lawsuit are only challenging the government's ability to liquidate the largest banks. The states are not challenging the composition of the consumer protection bureau.

D.C. Courts: Sequestration Won't Cause Layoffs, Furloughs

If Congress fails to reach an agreement by March 1 to avoid $85 billion in automatic budget cuts known as sequestration, the District of Columbia's local courts system could have to find $14 million in savings from its fiscal year 2013 budget. Court officials don't expect layoffs or furloughs, but declined to release details on how they would make the required cuts.

The spending cuts would be spread across court operations, capital projects, and the defender services budget, which includes funding for court-appointed lawyers for indigent defendants. The chief judges of Superior Court and the Court of Appeals declined to discuss the court's sequestration plan, as did officials in the executive office.

In a letter in the court system's monthly newsletter, executive office officials said that under the plan, the cuts would likely have a "significant" effect on infrastructure projects. Superior Court officials have had longstanding plans to expand the downtown courthouse, and in an interview late last year, Chief Judge Lee Satterfield said those plans could be put on hold if the court was faced with sequestration.

Judge Approves Class in Race Discrimination Suit Against Secret Service

More than a decade ago, a group of U.S. Secret Service agents sued over allegations that agency officials denied promotions on the basis of race. Yesterday, a judge in Washington approved a class of 120 current and former agents, setting up the potential for a trial that would explore claims that discrimination has persisted at the agency.

The agents, who filed suit in 2000 in Washington federal district court, had asked three times before for class certification. In the latest round, lawyers for the plaintiffs narrowed claims to certain groups of African American agents whose promotion bids, for specific government service levels, were denied in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Judge Richard Roberts of U.S. District for the District of Columbia concluded that the plaintiffs, through anecdotal evidence and an expert's statistical analysis, established sufficient commonality to allow the case to proceed as a class action.

The "interests of efficiency and uniformity support a finding that a class action is a superior method of adjudicating the plaintiffs’ claims," Roberts said in the ruling, published Tuesday.

Finnegan Henderson Shows Steady Rise in 2012

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner's managing partner has some key words for describing the Washington firm’s $348 million gross revenues in 2012, a 1.8 percent increase from the previous year. Steady. Comfortable. Maybe even boring.

"We're very comfortable with where we are, we're very comfortable with the financial situation at the firm," Finnegan Managing Partner Barbara McCurdy said. "We're kind of boring, I guess."

Finnegan, which had a disappointing 2010 because of the economy, appreciates the return to stability. A fixture in the Am Law 100, the firm in 2012 raised its profits per partner 2.7 percent, to $1.16 million, according to our reporting.

Covington & Burling's Gross Revenue Grew by 6.4 Percent in 2012

Covington & Burling saw another steady year of growth in 2012, posting a 6.4 percent jump in gross revenue and a 5.4 percent increase in profits per partner, according to our reporting. Firm chair Timothy Hester said that it was an especially good year for the firm's litigation, corporate and transactional, and life sciences practices.

The firm's gross revenue grew from $611 million in 2011 to $650 million last year. Net income increased by 9.4 percent and crossed the $300 million mark, growing from $275.5 million in 2011 to $301.5 million last year. Revenue per lawyer went up by 1.7 percent, from $865,000 in 2011 to $880,000 last year.

"I think it reflects the ongoing strategic plan that we've had in place for a number of years where we've been focused on solid steady growth in the firm and focused on some of the things that we believe we're doing exceptionally well in terms of practice areas," Hester said. "Our very strong patent litigation, insurance, white collar and products liability practices were all up last year."

Venable Sees Net Income, Profits Per Partner Rise in 2012

Bolstered in part by a strong year for the firm's real estate and tax practices, Venable saw a nearly 6 percent increase in gross revenue, up to $376 million from $355 million in 2011, according to our reporting. The firm said profits per partner were up 3.7 percent to $845,000.

Revenue per lawyer was up 2.7 percent, from $730,000 to $750,000, and net income was up 3.1 percent to $134 million. The number of equity partners—159—remained unchanged at Venable. The overall number of partners increased to 265, up 3.5 percent. The total number of lawyers at the firm also went up, from 488 to 501.

"When I look at how we did in 2012, month to month, the second half of the year for us was quite strong," said Venable co-managing partner Robert Waldman, who leads the firm's representation of tax-exempt organizations. "We feel very good about where we are now," he said later. "The firm is very healthy."