Ex-bankruptcy judge who tried to avoid deposition in romance case ordered to take ethics training
Judge David R. Jones, then a Texas bankruptcy judge, in August 2020. Jones has been sanctioned for trying to avoid a deposition by submitting to an unauthorized off-the-record interview with the law firm that employed his romantic partner. (Photo by Brett Coomer/The Houston Chronicle via Getty Images)
A former bankruptcy judge has been sanctioned for trying to avoid a deposition by submitting to an unauthorized off-the-record interview with the law firm that employed his romantic partner.
Former U.S. Bankruptcy Judge David R. Jones of Houston will have to take 7.5 hours of ethics training for a “flagrant contravention of his obligations” under the U.S. judicial code, said Chief U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Eduardo V. Rodriguez of the Southern District of Texas in an Aug. 16 opinion.
Law360, Reuters and Bloomberg Law have coverage.
Jones resigned in October 2023 after he was accused of having an undisclosed romantic relationship with Elizabeth Freeman, then a partner at the Houston bankruptcy firm Jackson Walker. Lawyers from the firm regularly appeared before Jones.
Rodriguez ruled in an action by the U.S. bankruptcy trustee that sought to claw back compensation to Jackson Walker in 33 cases.
Rodriguez issued an order to show cause after the bankruptcy trustee alerted the judge to Jones’ interview with Jackson Walker. The order required Jones, Jackson Walker and the lawyers who represented them to show cause why they should not be sanctioned or held in civil contempt.
Jackson Walker is represented by lawyers at Russell Hardin & Associates and Norton Rose Fulbright. Jones is represented by a lawyer at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan.
Rodriguez sanctioned only Jones, citing judiciary regulations banning federal judicial personnel from providing testimony about official acts without authorization.
Jones “knew what his obligations were and devised a contrived reading of the judiciary regulations to try to justify his own personal goals in avoiding the need to provide sworn testimony in this proceeding,” Rodriguez wrote.
Jones had argued that the regulations applied only to sworn testimony.
Jones “would rather ask for forgiveness than permission from this court, something that this court does not take well even on a normal day, much less in a proceeding as sensitive as this one. As such, this court finds that Mr. Jones has, in bad faith, flouted his obligations under the judiciary regulations in this proceeding in an attempt to further his own goals,” Rodriguez said.
Rodriguez criticized but did not sanction Jackson Walker and the other lawyers. He noted that they were not covered by the judiciary regulations that applied to Jones and “narrowly” concluded that they did not act in bad faith.
No court order specifically banned the informal interview, but a court order placing the deposition on hold amid disputes over deposition topics “should have strongly made the parties question whether or not an informal interview was permitted in this case,” Rodriguez said.
“The court finds that the parties knew they were standing on thin ice,” Rodriguez said.
He said he “strongly admonishes” their “fast and loose approach to participating in an interview that touches upon the same topics and subject matter that this court is currently has under advisement. With the amount of legal talent involved in this case, and the sensitive nature of this proceeding, it is incredulous to this court that well-seasoned attorneys would play with fire like this and proceed on such a legally dubious course of action.”
The case is In Re: Professional Fee Matters Concerning the Jackson Walker Law Firm.
See also:
Texas bankruptcy judge questioned over relationship with local lawyer
Partner denied any current relationship with bankruptcy judge, Jackson Walker firm says
