The defendants have now filed reply briefs in support of their motions to dismiss the lawsuit brought by the 38 Duke lacrosse players and certain members of their families.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Attorneys for the 38 players today filed briefs in opposition to the defendants' motions to dismiss their lawsuit.
- Opposition to Duke University's Motion to Dismiss; Exhibits 1 and 2
- Opposition to Duke SANE Defendants' Motion to Dismiss
- Opposition to the City of Durham's Motion to Dismiss; Exhibit 1
- Opposition to Addison's Motion to Dismiss
- Opposition to Gottlieb's Motion to Dismiss
- Opposition to Durham Supervisors' Motion to Dismiss
- Opposition to Himan-Wilson's Motion to Dismiss
- Opposition to Covington's Motion to Dismiss
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Back on April 15, Chief Judge James A. Beaty, Jr. of the US District Court in
Judge Beaty denied the sanctions motion and issued an order which included guidance to both the plaintiffs’ and the defendants’ attorneys about their relations to the news media.
We are now able to post the transcript of the hearing.
Reproduced below is the transcript of Chief Judge Beaty's order as issued from the bench. It begins on page 47 of the transcript:
THE COURT: The Court has considered the motions that have been filed in this case and the arguments of counsel made this date. Early on the Court made mention to Mr. Cowan about the two-part basis of Rule 3.6 and whether or not any statements that might be made by an attorney to the media will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing any of the proceedings, and particularly a jury trial in this case, so that each party would have a fair and impartial hearing before the Court.
The motion before the Court is one by the
and other Defendants to sanction Plaintiffs for alleged violations of North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct 3.6 and as they may have been adopted by the local rules of this court. The Court has heard the arguments and has taken each of those into account. The Court has reviewed as well both the website that -- the portions that were presented here in the courtroom and as part of the Court's own consideration of this motion. Based upon the arguments and evidence presented, Defendants' motion for sanctions at this time is denied. Defendant Duke University
However, all of the attorneys in this case are cautioned against making or authorizing any statements that will have a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing any of the proceedings going forward regardless of what publicity may have occurred in the past. In addition, to the extent Plaintiffs' counsel maintains their website about this case, either directly or through an agent, Plaintiffs' counsel is cautioned that they are responsible for the content of that website and for ensuring that any material contained in, quoted to or linked to on their website complies with the obligation of Professional Rules of Conduct 3.6.
Of course, as presented under the present circumstances, nothing that this Court rules on as a part of this announcement affects or limits any third party, including any member of the media or other persons acting independently of the attorneys in this case.
As this case proceeds, the Court will consider whether any specific protective orders may be necessary to ensure the integrity of the proceedings is maintained and that a fair jury pool is not materially prejudiced.
The Court will deny the motion for sanctions that is present before the Court.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Lawyers for Duke, Durham and other defendants filed responses yesterday to the players' motion for a mandatory discovery conference.
Monday, June 2, 2008
On May 22, lawyers for the players filed a motion requesting that the Court order counsel for the defendants to participate in a mandatory discovery conference.
Read the motion here.
Friday, May 30, 2008
As expected, Duke University and the other defendants today filed motions to dismiss the lawsuit by the 38 players and family members. We post their supporting memoranda and exhibits here:
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Chief Judge James A. Beaty, Jr. of the US District Court in
Judge Beatty issued an order which included guidance to both the plaintiffs’ and the defendants’ attorneys about their relations to the news media. We will study the judge’s guidance and govern ourselves accordingly.
Friday, April 11, 2008
Monday, April 7, 2008
This afternoon, lawyers for the 38 Duke lacrosse players filed a brief in US District Court in Winston-Salem opposing the City of Durham's gag motion. The brief is here and the exhibit is here.
UPDATE: Here is Durham's joinder motion, an affidavit in support of defendant's gag motion and the brief in support of Durham's joinder motion. These were filed with the court in mid-March while I was away. Apologies for not posting them before now.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Duke lawyers filed a reply to the Duke lacrosse players in the ongoing struggle over the players' right to provide information about their lawsuit. Here is Duke's brief and the accompanying exhibits: A and B.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Duke's motion to keep information about this case out of the media is utterly meritless. We will file our response promptly.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Monday, February 25, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Here is the video from the news conference on February 21, 2008. It was held on at 1 p.m. at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. The news conference is 49 minutes in length.
Speaking first is Robert Bork, Jr., spokesman for the plaintiffs and their law firm. Second, is Charles J. Cooper, Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, who represents the plaintiffs in this legal action. Third is Steven Henkelman, the father former Duke lacrosse team member, Eric Henkelman. Both are plaintiffs. Finally, there is a question and answer session with members of the news media.
Friday, February 22, 2008
I was misquoted. It isn't the first time and surely won't be the last, but this one is worth noting and correcting.
I was quoted out of context by the Raleigh News and Observer this morning:
The event was at the National Press Building in downtown Washington, a block from the White House.
"This is kind of a media center," said Bork, son of the Supreme Court nominee rejected during the Reagan years. "And Durham isn't. Sorry."
What I said was that we held it in Washington because the law firm representing the players and their families is located in Washington, D.C., many of the families live there and I chose the National Press Club because of facilities that make it a center for media events. Several reporters from North Carolina had complained to me about having to come to DC. So, I apologized by saying, “Sorry.” I never said “Durham isn’t.”
UPDATED, 7:20 pm:
Sorry, another misquote in the same story. I didn't notice it before until a blogger mentioned it this afternoon.
The players chose not to appear at the news conference, said Bob Bork Jr., the group's hired publicist, because they don't want to attract attention.
The blogger thought this was a stupid comment on my part because the players filed a lawsuit that was bound to attract attention. He would have been correct if that was what I had said.
Well, here's the reason I gave for the players' absence. You will see that what the paper reported can't be extracted from what I said.
None of the 38 players who are filing this lawsuit are here today. They considered participating, but many have jobs and some are still students and lacrosse team members at Duke. One is in Army Ranger school preparing to deploy to
Know this -- the players are united behind this lawsuit. At the same time that they are understandably concerned about retribution and negative, maybe even slanderous media coverage. Who can blame them after what they endured for 13 months in 2006 and 2007. They are walking a fine line between trying to live normal lives in the wake of an unspeakable trauma and at the same time trying to get answers to questions that remain unaddressed by their university.
They need to have peace to heal, but there can be no healing without accountability.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Sorry for the delay. We had to wait for confirmation that the complaint was filed. Also, it is a large file and I am uploading it in parts.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
38 Duke Lacrosse Players to Announce Lawsuit Against On Thursday, February 21, 38 Duke lacrosse players and their parents will hold a news conference at 1 p.m. at the National Press Club in
On Thursday, February 21, 38 Duke lacrosse players and their parents will hold a news conference at 1 p.m. at the National Press Club in
Charles J. Cooper, attorney for the players will explain the complaint and answer questions from the media.
Only credentialed media will be allowed.
For more information, please email email@example.com.