INADMISSIBLE: Patton Boggs Abandons Ecuador Case

The National Law Journal

   | 1 Comments

What does the $15 million settlement Patton Boggs reached with Chevron Corp. last week mean for the teetering law firm? Foremost, it wipes away a problem — rooted in the firm's fight against Chevron over environmental damage claims in Ecuador. Plus more in this week's column.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Darren McKinney

    That a presitgious firm like Patton Boggs would have gotten within 10 miles of Steve Donziger‘s fraudulent litigation scheme, which Clinton-appointed federal Judge Lewis Kaplan found to include coercion, bribery, money laundering and other misconduct, is truly astounding. Such involvement suggests that fraud and deception have, quite troublingly, become far too common and quietly accepted, even among some elite elements of the legal profession.

    So, like Chevron, CSX, Feld Entertainment and Garlock, a growing number of companies that have been targeted by fraudulent litigation are beginning to fight back with the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act -- a statute originally designed as a tool for prosecuting organized crime. But why are these fraud victims left alone to defend themselves? Why are bar associations, state attorneys general, the Justice Department and Congress seemingly content to look the other way? Have they no interest in investigating and punishing those who perpetrate fraud on our courts?

    -Darren McKinney, American Tort Reform Association, Washington, D.C.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202654766856

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.