"A whole lot of drunken lawyers" ..... more law society debauchers?
Good Day Readers:
As we read the case study below we couldn't help but wonder, speaking hypothetically of course, supposing this had taken place in Manitoba and somehow the Law Society had, as lawyers like to say, black print - solid evidence the alleged debauchery had indeed occurred - how do you think the LSM would have reacted:
(a) acted quickly to conduct a thorough investigation resulting in a multiply count prosecution and conviction leading to disbarment
(b) issued a reprimand(s)
(c) did nothing because no formal complaint was received
Wonder what our Legal Affairs Contributor VJH thinks?
The Cast : David G. (George) Cowling, Adrian D. Jakibchuk and Sarah Diebel
While there are several Google references to Mr. Gowling all referenced Matthews Dinsdale & Clark LLP. However, a check of the firm's lawyers did not reveal his name. Therefore, it's simply unclear whether he's actively practicing law at this time and if wo where?
Using Google Mr. Adrian D. Jakibchuk was located at Toronto area firm Sherrard Kuzz LLP.
A picture of a Sarah Diebel appears on the internet, however, there was no way to independently confirm and verify it was indeed the same individual as that mentioned in The Toronto Star story. Therefore, we decided not to post it.
Doesn't get much jucier than this!
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
________________________________________________________
'Night of debauchery' haunts law firm
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Brett Popplewwell
Staff Reporter
A “night of debauchery” at a King Street West nightclub that resulted in three Toronto lawyers leaving their jobs has sparked a $1.3 million wrongful dismissal lawsuit against a legal firm known for its labour relations acumen.
Lawyer Adrian Jakibchuk alleges he was unfairly treated by his former employer, Mathews Dinsdale & Clark LLP, after he himself was sued by David Cowling, a partner in the firm.
Cowling had accused Jakibchuk and another lawyer of having defamed him during an investigation into Cowling’s behaviour at a 2009 event hosted by the firm.
The story of how the notable Queen Street law firm became embroiled in its own labour relations nightmare begins on the dance floor of the Cheval Night Club on January 24, 2009.
MDC was hosting a late-night party that allegedly involved lap dances, inappropriate touching and a whole lot of drunken lawyers. (emphasis ours)
The party was commemorating the firm’s annual “moot” competition which brings students from across the country to Toronto every January. Students represent their respective universities during staged labour relation debates and later partake in an “after party,” where the firm’s partners and lawyers party the night away.
But the events at that 2009 party have become the subject of two lawsuits and an internal investigation by the firm.
The catalyst for it all was a 13-page complaint about the party penned the next day by Sarah Diebel, then a junior lawyer with the firm. She delivered it to an MDC partner in accordance with the firm’s sexual harassment policy.
In the letter, Diebel described the party as a “night of debauchery” where “free booze flowed” and where the firm’s partners became “extremely intoxicated.”
She described at length how partners behaved inappropriately, and at one point singled out Cowling and another lawyer for “rubbing their butts up against me and other women.”
Diebel later concluded: “While I like to dance, I don’t like being groped.”
Diebel’s letter was used by the firm to launch an internal investigation.
Three days after the party, MDC’s managing partner announced it would no longer host, sponsor or participate in any after parties.
As part of the firm’s investigation, Jakibchuk, who was also at the party, was asked to recount what he witnessed. In his statement, he described how Cowling danced with a young woman others have described as one of the firm’s summer students.
Cowling “was behind her,” Jakibchuk said in his statement. “He felt her left breast from behind and smirked.”
None of the allegations put forward by Diebel or Jakibchuk were ever proven in court.
After Jakibchuk gave his statement, MDC hired an external counsel to investigate the allegations. The results of that investigation have not been made public.
Following the investigation, Cowling, a 44-year-old married man and father of three, sued Diebel and Jakibchuk for $2.3 million in damages, saying they had “falsely and maliciously” defamed him.
Last January, MDC gave Cowling a letter stating the firm believed he had conducted himself appropriately and “acted at all times during the weekend of the competition in an appropriate and professional manner.”
Cowling, who resigned from the firm March 31, has since agreed to drop the defamation suit.
Though he could not provide the Star with a copy of the internal investigation’s final report, Cowling said he “was exonerated of any wrongdoing with respect to all of the false allegations, but this fact was not made public.”
“In the face of the public false allegations, I was forced to commence an action in defamation against the defendants in order to address the attacks on my reputation.”
In her statement of defence put before the court in response to Cowling’s allegations of defamation, Diebel elaborated on her letter of complaint.
She described how the night began at the Cambridge Club, a private club near Richmond and Bay Streets where about 100 students and guests enjoyed access to an open bar. The party then moved to Cheval, where the firm had arranged for another open bar.
There, “a number of attendees exhibited behaviour that could only be described as a lack of professionalism or intoxication,” according to Diebel’s statement.
“One of the firm’s lawyers put his arms around a student contestant from Dalhousie University” while another “received a sexually suggestive ‘lap dance’ from a woman who was neither his wife nor an invitee of MDC in full view of the other attendees in the MDC section. . . .
“One of the senior associates of MDC was so intoxicated that he left the club without his coat or keys and vomited in the taxi cab as it left the club. . . .
“As the evening progressed, one of the 2009 summer students became very intoxicated. Her speech was slurred and she was so unsteady on her feet that as she walked across the floor, she fell. As the student fell, she was scooped up by Cowling.
“Cowling and the very intoxicated summer student began to dance in a sexually explicit manner. The student’s arms were around Cowling’s neck and his hands were on her waist and buttocks. While dancing, Cowling placed his hand on the student’s breast. Shortly thereafter, the summer student fell to the floor. She was assisted to her feet by Cowling and others. The summer student then went to the washroom where she vomited over her hair, body and clothes.”
Diebel resigned her position at MDC on June 5, 2009, and took up a job as legal counsel at the Ontario Power Authority.
Jakibchuk left the firm a year later.
In his wrongful dismissal lawsuit, Jakibchuk accuses the firm of refusing to assign him new work and of ostracizing him as a result of Cowling’s lawsuit.
“As a result of the poisoned work environment . . . Jakibchuk was compelled to leave the firm on May 3, 2010,” his statement reads.
As part of his lawsuit, Jakibchuk is requesting a declaration that MDC breached the Human Rights Code because he was subjected to reprisals for having abided by the company’s harassment policy.
Jakibchuk “was sued for libel because he responded to the firm asking him to tell them what he saw,” said his lawyer, Paul Schabas. “And he was met with a libel suit by a partner and then lost his job as a result of it.”
Terry O’Sullivan, counsel for the firm, would not comment on the case other than to say: “The firm will be filing a statement of defence shortly.
“It is the position of the firm that (Jakibchuk’s) claim is entirely without merit. The firm’s position will be set out in its statement of defence.”
As we read the case study below we couldn't help but wonder, speaking hypothetically of course, supposing this had taken place in Manitoba and somehow the Law Society had, as lawyers like to say, black print - solid evidence the alleged debauchery had indeed occurred - how do you think the LSM would have reacted:
(a) acted quickly to conduct a thorough investigation resulting in a multiply count prosecution and conviction leading to disbarment
(b) issued a reprimand(s)
(c) did nothing because no formal complaint was received
Wonder what our Legal Affairs Contributor VJH thinks?
The Cast : David G. (George) Cowling, Adrian D. Jakibchuk and Sarah Diebel
While there are several Google references to Mr. Gowling all referenced Matthews Dinsdale & Clark LLP. However, a check of the firm's lawyers did not reveal his name. Therefore, it's simply unclear whether he's actively practicing law at this time and if wo where?
Using Google Mr. Adrian D. Jakibchuk was located at Toronto area firm Sherrard Kuzz LLP.
A picture of a Sarah Diebel appears on the internet, however, there was no way to independently confirm and verify it was indeed the same individual as that mentioned in The Toronto Star story. Therefore, we decided not to post it.
Doesn't get much jucier than this!
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
________________________________________________________
'Night of debauchery' haunts law firm
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Brett Popplewwell
Staff Reporter
A “night of debauchery” at a King Street West nightclub that resulted in three Toronto lawyers leaving their jobs has sparked a $1.3 million wrongful dismissal lawsuit against a legal firm known for its labour relations acumen.
Lawyer Adrian Jakibchuk alleges he was unfairly treated by his former employer, Mathews Dinsdale & Clark LLP, after he himself was sued by David Cowling, a partner in the firm.
Cowling had accused Jakibchuk and another lawyer of having defamed him during an investigation into Cowling’s behaviour at a 2009 event hosted by the firm.
The story of how the notable Queen Street law firm became embroiled in its own labour relations nightmare begins on the dance floor of the Cheval Night Club on January 24, 2009.
MDC was hosting a late-night party that allegedly involved lap dances, inappropriate touching and a whole lot of drunken lawyers. (emphasis ours)
The party was commemorating the firm’s annual “moot” competition which brings students from across the country to Toronto every January. Students represent their respective universities during staged labour relation debates and later partake in an “after party,” where the firm’s partners and lawyers party the night away.
But the events at that 2009 party have become the subject of two lawsuits and an internal investigation by the firm.
The catalyst for it all was a 13-page complaint about the party penned the next day by Sarah Diebel, then a junior lawyer with the firm. She delivered it to an MDC partner in accordance with the firm’s sexual harassment policy.
In the letter, Diebel described the party as a “night of debauchery” where “free booze flowed” and where the firm’s partners became “extremely intoxicated.”
She described at length how partners behaved inappropriately, and at one point singled out Cowling and another lawyer for “rubbing their butts up against me and other women.”
Diebel later concluded: “While I like to dance, I don’t like being groped.”
Diebel’s letter was used by the firm to launch an internal investigation.
Three days after the party, MDC’s managing partner announced it would no longer host, sponsor or participate in any after parties.
As part of the firm’s investigation, Jakibchuk, who was also at the party, was asked to recount what he witnessed. In his statement, he described how Cowling danced with a young woman others have described as one of the firm’s summer students.
Cowling “was behind her,” Jakibchuk said in his statement. “He felt her left breast from behind and smirked.”
None of the allegations put forward by Diebel or Jakibchuk were ever proven in court.
After Jakibchuk gave his statement, MDC hired an external counsel to investigate the allegations. The results of that investigation have not been made public.
Following the investigation, Cowling, a 44-year-old married man and father of three, sued Diebel and Jakibchuk for $2.3 million in damages, saying they had “falsely and maliciously” defamed him.
Last January, MDC gave Cowling a letter stating the firm believed he had conducted himself appropriately and “acted at all times during the weekend of the competition in an appropriate and professional manner.”
Cowling, who resigned from the firm March 31, has since agreed to drop the defamation suit.
Though he could not provide the Star with a copy of the internal investigation’s final report, Cowling said he “was exonerated of any wrongdoing with respect to all of the false allegations, but this fact was not made public.”
“In the face of the public false allegations, I was forced to commence an action in defamation against the defendants in order to address the attacks on my reputation.”
In her statement of defence put before the court in response to Cowling’s allegations of defamation, Diebel elaborated on her letter of complaint.
She described how the night began at the Cambridge Club, a private club near Richmond and Bay Streets where about 100 students and guests enjoyed access to an open bar. The party then moved to Cheval, where the firm had arranged for another open bar.
There, “a number of attendees exhibited behaviour that could only be described as a lack of professionalism or intoxication,” according to Diebel’s statement.
“One of the firm’s lawyers put his arms around a student contestant from Dalhousie University” while another “received a sexually suggestive ‘lap dance’ from a woman who was neither his wife nor an invitee of MDC in full view of the other attendees in the MDC section. . . .
“One of the senior associates of MDC was so intoxicated that he left the club without his coat or keys and vomited in the taxi cab as it left the club. . . .
“As the evening progressed, one of the 2009 summer students became very intoxicated. Her speech was slurred and she was so unsteady on her feet that as she walked across the floor, she fell. As the student fell, she was scooped up by Cowling.
“Cowling and the very intoxicated summer student began to dance in a sexually explicit manner. The student’s arms were around Cowling’s neck and his hands were on her waist and buttocks. While dancing, Cowling placed his hand on the student’s breast. Shortly thereafter, the summer student fell to the floor. She was assisted to her feet by Cowling and others. The summer student then went to the washroom where she vomited over her hair, body and clothes.”
Diebel resigned her position at MDC on June 5, 2009, and took up a job as legal counsel at the Ontario Power Authority.
Jakibchuk left the firm a year later.
In his wrongful dismissal lawsuit, Jakibchuk accuses the firm of refusing to assign him new work and of ostracizing him as a result of Cowling’s lawsuit.
“As a result of the poisoned work environment . . . Jakibchuk was compelled to leave the firm on May 3, 2010,” his statement reads.
As part of his lawsuit, Jakibchuk is requesting a declaration that MDC breached the Human Rights Code because he was subjected to reprisals for having abided by the company’s harassment policy.
Jakibchuk “was sued for libel because he responded to the firm asking him to tell them what he saw,” said his lawyer, Paul Schabas. “And he was met with a libel suit by a partner and then lost his job as a result of it.”
Terry O’Sullivan, counsel for the firm, would not comment on the case other than to say: “The firm will be filing a statement of defence shortly.
“It is the position of the firm that (Jakibchuk’s) claim is entirely without merit. The firm’s position will be set out in its statement of defence.”
posted by Clare L. Pieuk at 11:18 PM
1 Comments:
Good Day Mr. Pieuk,
I was very amused by your posting about "a whole lot of drunken lawyers", and I think those of us that have contact with the profession have stories about what happens "behind closed doors" during firm functions.
While I could regale you with tales from the coffee shop, they are all hearsay and I can't, in good conscience, provide information that I cannot confirm through independent public sources.
That being said, I have heard of some Manitoba firms described as "Soddam" and "Gomorrah" due to the indiscreations that occur during firm functions. I will note that in the last Communique, Brenlee Carrington Trepel, the Equity Ombudsperson for the Law Society of Manitoba, in an article entitled "Best Practices for Articling and Pre-employment Interviews" saw fit to point out that asking female students for sexual favours is a no-no under the heading "past interview mistakes."
http://www.lawsociety.mb.ca/publications/communique/LSM%20-%20January%202011.pdf/view
If Manitoba lawfirms are such bastions of professionalsim and appropriate conduct, why does the Ombudsperson need to point out that firms have done this in the past, unless, it is still happening?
Considering the profession had knowledge of the King/Chapman/Douglas mess long before the public and were not surprised by the behaviour, does this not also tell the public that sexual harassment is alive and well within the hallowed halls of Manitoba lawfirms?
I suspect there is a lot that goes on in lawfirms that is quietly "handled" and not subjected to the light of day and public scrutiney. Your article shows that finding representation will be very difficult. What lawyer is going to represent you if you want to sue a lawfirm for sexual harassment? To do so is career suicide.
Continuing to seek...
VJH
Post a Comment
<< Home