Ex-bankruptcy judge David Jones defeats bid for his phone records in tangled fee dispute
By Dietrich Knauth
Aug 7 (Reuters) -Former U.S. bankruptcy judge David Jones will not have his government cell phone records probed in a battle over attorneys' fees that he approved for his romantic partner's former law firm, a judge ruled Wednesday.
Jones resigned from the bench in October 2023 after admitting to a long-term, undisclosed relationship with bankruptcy attorney Liz Freeman, who was a partner at the law firm Jackson Walker, which regularly filed cases in Jones' court.
The U.S. Department of Justice's bankruptcy watchdog, the office of the U.S. Trustee, has argued that Jackson Walker should disgorge millions of dollars in legal fees that Jones approved in 33 bankruptcy cases filed by Jackson Walker.
As part of the fee dispute, an administrator charged with wrapping up J.C. Penney Co's 2020 bankruptcy had sought to subpoena a comprehensive record of calls and texts from Jones' government-issued cell phone, seeking to investigate a "rumor" that Jones improperly exchanged text messages with lawyers while he was presiding over the case.
But U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Eduardo Rodriguez ruled at a Wednesday court hearing in Houston that the proposed subpoena was not properly targeted to the current fee dispute or the administrator's concern that Jones' conduct had a negative impact on J.C. Penney's bankruptcy.
"This is too broad of a request," Rodriguez said.
The subpoena could reveal every phone number that Jones had contact with while he was on the bench, including the non-public phone numbers of other judges or court staff, Rodriguez said.
Attorneys for Jones and a spokesman for Jackson did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Rodriguez said that the J.C. Penney administrator could return with a scaled-down demand for records related to specific phone numbers, after it investigates the rumor further from other sources.
Rodriguez also discussed a recent meeting between Jones and Jackson Walker, for which Rodriguez had threatened sanctions.
That portion of the hearing was not made public due to Rodriguez's concern about a judicial policy that prevents judges from testifying about their official acts.
Rodriguez said in a Saturday court order that Jones and Jackson Walker may have violated that policy, and his previous court orders, by meeting informally while Rodriguez was still deciding what topics Jones could discuss in depositions with Jackson Walker and the U.S. Trustee.
Rodriguez said he will quickly review Wednesday's discussion to determine what portions of the hearing can be publicly disclosed by transcript or audio recording.
"I'm pretty confident most of it should be unsealed," Rodrigez said after the closed portion of the hearing concluded.
The case is In Re: Professional Fee Matters Concerning the Jackson Walker Law Firm, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, No. 23-00645.
For Jones: Ben Finestone and Joanna Caytas of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan
For Jackson Walker: Jason Boland of Norton Rose Fulbright
For the J.C. Penney plan administrator: Stephen Lemmon of Streusand, Landon, Ozburn & Lemmon
Read more:
Top US bankruptcy judge resigns amid ethics inquiry
Law firm says Texas judge wanted 'untruthful' statement about lawyer romance
Ex-bankruptcy judge plays defense on pre-deposition talks, phone records
Reporting by Dietrich Knauth in New York
Activos relacionados
Últimas noticias
Descargo de responsabilidades: Cada una de las entidades de XM Group proporciona un servicio de solo ejecución y acceso a nuestra plataforma de trading online, permitiendo a una persona ver o usar el contenido disponible en o a través del sitio web, sin intención de cambiarlo ni ampliarlo. Dicho acceso y uso están sujetos en todo momento a: (i) Términos y Condiciones; (ii) Advertencias de riesgo; y (iii) Descargo completo de responsabilidades. Por lo tanto, dicho contenido se proporciona exclusivamente como información general. En particular, por favor tenga en cuenta que, los contenidos de nuestra plataforma de trading online no son ni solicitud ni una oferta para entrar a realizar transacciones en los mercados financieros. Operar en cualquier mercado financiero implica un nivel de riesgo significativo para su capital.
Todo el material publicado en nuestra plataforma de trading online tiene únicamente fines educativos/informativos y no contiene –y no debe considerarse que contenga– asesoramiento ni recomendaciones financieras, tributarias o de inversión, ni un registro de nuestros precios de trading, ni una oferta ni solicitud de transacción con instrumentos financieros ni promociones financieras no solicitadas.
Cualquier contenido de terceros, así como el contenido preparado por XM, como por ejemplo opiniones, noticias, investigaciones, análisis, precios, otras informaciones o enlaces a sitios de terceros que figuran en este sitio web se proporcionan “tal cual”, como comentarios generales del mercado y no constituyen un asesoramiento en materia de inversión. En la medida en que cualquier contenido se interprete como investigación de inversión, usted debe tener en cuenta y aceptar que dicho contenido no fue concebido ni elaborado de acuerdo con los requisitos legales diseñados para promover la independencia en materia de investigación de inversiones y, por tanto, se considera como una comunicación comercial en virtud de las leyes y regulaciones pertinentes. Por favor, asegúrese de haber leído y comprendido nuestro Aviso sobre investigación de inversión no independiente y advertencia de riesgo en relación con la información anterior, al que se puede acceder aquí.
