A major race discrimination case, which became notable for what some considered outrageous conduct by lawyers, has been settled.
”Are you a member of the Negro race? Is your father a member of the Negro race? On what do you base that answer? Do you contend your mother is a member of the Negro race? Is any ancestor of yours Caucasian? Can you tell me what the difference is between a Negro with some Caucasian ancestors and a Caucasian with some Negro ancestors? Do you represent Jews?”
Believe it or not, those were some of the questions asked by attorneys at prestigious Jenner & Block during 16 days of pretrial depositions resulting from a 1977 class-action suit filed by a group of blacks and Hispanics who failed to get apprentice or journeyman jobs in Chicago Journeyman Plumbers Local 130.
It explained why the firm, which represented the union, drew the wrath of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the Chicago Lawyers` Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. The firm formally defended its actions, while alleging that plaintiffs lawyers acted unprofessionally during those same depositions, but some lawyers within the firm privately concede its interrogations were out of hand.
The matter of lawyer conduct came before then-Senior District Judge Edwin Robson. He rebuked plaintiffs attorneys Judson Miner and Nancy Anderson for instructing their clients not to answer many of those questions. Robson threw out the lawsuit and referred the two attorneys` names to a court committee for possible sanctions.
A federal appeals court reversed Robson`s dismissal of the suit and sent it back to another judge for resolution of the merits. What ensued was years of initially fruitless attempts to resolve the dispute. The case took an important turn when District Judge Marvin Aspen decided to farm out the case to Stephen Goldberg, a Northwestern law professor and mediation specialist who is a well-known proponent of what`s known as ”alternative methods of dispute resolution.”
With Goldberg guiding negotiations, progress was slowly made with Miner and Robert Graham, a Jenner & Block partner not involved in the disputed questioning but picked to try to craft an accord on behalf of the firm`s client, the Plumbing Contractors` Association of Chicago.
A tentative settlement was quietly filed Friday. It will be the subject of an April 11 fairness hearing before Aspen. The defendants, who include the traditionally white-dominated plumbers Local 130, do not admit any wrongdoing as part of the settlement.
Under the accord, each future apprentice class will contain at least 27.5 percent blacks and Hispanics. Special preference will be given the hundreds of minority group members who have applied for the apprentice program since April 2, 1969, and who met the key standards but were never notified to show up for an interview or were told they weren`t admitted.
The plaintiffs will be allowed to have an observer present when applications are being taken, when interviews are conducted and as the selection process unfolds. One black, Hispanic and white journeyman member will be chosen by the local to consult with or in other ways help participants in the apprentice program. Moreover, a plaintiffs` lawyer can review the record of anyone dismissed.
As for journeymen, all blacks and Hispanics who are licensed plumbers and apply to become Local 130 members will be offered membership. Once again, if someone`s performance is found insufficient, an attorney can review and question the union`s decision.
The defendants will set up an educational and training program for members of minority groups and pay a total of $58,500 to the six named plaintiffs in the case. A binding, nonappealable decision on attorney fees will be rendered by Goldberg.
”Construction is one of the industries that has most consistently kept out minorities,” said Miner. ”This removes those barriers as far as the plumbers.”
”It`s an excellent settlement,” said Graham, who was a defendants`
counsel along with Robert Subkowsky and Lawrence Ehrlich.
And what about those very questionable attorney actions of long ago? Both Graham and Miner said they consider that element to be old, best-forgotten news.
FEDERAL JUSTICES INTERESTED IN EYLER
Chicago defense attorney David Schippers just received curious news from the U.S. Supreme Court involving client Larry Eyler, who`s charged with the 1983 murder of Ralph Calise.
The Illinois Supreme Court had declined to consider a 2-1 state appeals court ruling that affirmed a decision by Lake County Judge William Block. Block said that Indiana state troopers did not have probable cause to search Eyler`s pickup truck in 1983. He suppressed evidence that the troopers had passed along to Lake County authorities and that was considered a key link to the Calise murder.
Without the evidence, Lake County State`s Atty. Fred Foreman decided not to proceed with the case and, instead, to appeal the decisions involving Eyler. Eyler, after making bond, was later charged with the Aug. 21, 1984, murder and dismemberment of Daniel Bridges, 16. When Illinois Assistant Atty. Gen. Mark Rotert filed a routine petition asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear an appeal, Schippers waived a response to the state`s petition. Last week, the court directed Schippers to file a brief.
At the very least, it suggests that a court that has proved quite interested in firming up and expanding police powers is seriously considering taking and ruling on the Eyler case.
SIDLEY & AUSTIN RESTS ITS CASE
The Wall Street Journal, the daily diary of the American dream, caused a fleeting nightmare for the folks at Sidley & Austin, who exacted some retribution. It involved a Feb. 7 article, ostensibly based on documents released by Sen. Howard Metzenbaum (D, Ohio).
The documents purported to show that Sidley attorneys Sam Skinner and William Conlon had joined the firm, whose clients include G.D. Searle & Co., after making a decision not to prosecute Searle for allegedly falsifying test results of aspartame, now marketed as NutraSweet.
The Journal article went further in suggesting slimy dealings by Skinner and Conlon (The Tribune ran a Feb. 7 piece based on the same Metzenbaum claims, but the law firm didn`t have any problem with that version).
This prompted a letter to Albert Hunt, a veteran Washington political pundit on TV talk shows and chief of the newspaper`s bureau there, from Sidley partner Ben Heineman Jr., as well as a letter to the editor from managing partner Blair White. White`s letter included a rather exhaustive, 12-page refutation of Metzenbaum`s claims and the article.
Among many screw-ups by Metzenbaum, repeated or compounded by the Journal, was the claim Skinner decided to ditch the prosecution of Searle while U.S. attorney. In fact, the decision was made by his successor and Harold Washington`s on-again, off-again, on-again favorite, Thomas Sullivan. By week`s end, the Journal ran a correction and Sidley partners were presumably back to sending letters to paying clients.
INSURER RILES PATIENTS` LAWYERS
Attorneys representing patients suing a Chicago podiatrist for malpractice are hot from nose to toes over what one lawyer calls ”extreme bad faith” by the doctor`s insurance company. The company represents Seymour Kessler, a podiatrist who operated two clinics where he performed what he called minimal incision surgery on patients with foot ailments like bunions and crooked toes. He claimed that he perfected a new method of outpatient surgery that allowed patients to walk home after the operations. He`s been sued by dozens of former patients, and the Illinois Department of Registration and Education is seeking to revoke his medical license. Attorney James Ball, who represents three plaintiffs, claims he came to a settlement conference in one case and was told by lawyers for CNA Insurance that Kessler`s $1 million- a-year policy was depleted by earlier settlements and that the best offer that could be made was $7,500. His client, Mary Martzell, a nurse who had to quit her job because her feet were allegedly so damaged by Kessler, was spooked by the possibility that waiting longer would result in no money being left and settled for $9,000. Last week, Ball tried to persuade Circuit Judge Charles Freeman to vacate all past settlements and put all the money in one pool to be divided ”equitably.” The judge denied the request.
COUNSEL SUSPENSION MAY BE RESCINDED
An interesting matter may play out behind closed doors Friday at an executive session of the Illinois Medical Center Commission, a seven-member body with authority over the West Side Medical Center. It involves general counsel Edward A. Scott Jr., who was suspended with pay in December shortly after the Illinois Supreme Court censured him for converting and commingling client funds. The censure was considered far too lenient by the Illinois Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission, which prosecuted the case. Scott had at first failed to answer the disciplinary commission`s complaint and a hearing panel had recommended he be suspended from the practice of law for six months. Then he hired an attorney, the ubiquitious William Harte, convinced another hearing panel to lessen the punishment and the high court went along. Now, there`s a move afoot on the commission to quietly rescind the suspension. Of the seven commission members, four are appointed by Gov. James Thompson, one by County Board President George Dunne, one by Mayor Harold Washington and one by Park District Board President John McHugh.
BRIEFS: The City Corporation Counsel`s office has a new first assistant, E. Wayne Robinson, who replaces Edwin Gausselin, who resigned; a new first deputy, Joseph Gagliardo, and a new deputy replacing Robinson, James Alexander. . . . On Friday`s daily schedule of cases distributed by the U.S. Attorney`s Office was 86-C-LOVE, COULSON V. SHAFERNICH, referring to a Valentine Day`s special, the marriage of Assistant U.S. Atty. William Coulson and Beth Shafernich by District Judge Ann Williams.
