Ex-Staffer’s ‘Sexual Predator’ Suit ‘Ridiculous,’ Says Big PI Lawyer

Tort Law

Ex-Staffer’s ‘Sexual Predator’ Suit ‘Ridiculous,’ Says Big PI Lawyer

Posted Aug 1, 2008, 05:39 pm CDT
By Martha Neil

A former paralegal's allegation that he is a "sexual predator" is but one of many "untrue" and "ridiculous" claims in her lawsuit against him and two law firms at which he worked, a prominent Houston plaintiffs attorney says.

Likewise, Angela Robinson's claims that he cheated clients on some fees "make no sense," Richard Laminack tells Texas Lawyer, and he also disputes her contention that she is owed some $27,000 in unpaid overtime.

In fact, he tells the legal publication, cheating on the overtime she charged the firm was one of the primary reasons Robinson was fired. Her attorney denies that she did so, and says Robinson was terminated without explanation.

In addition to claiming that Laminack's actions created a hostile work environment, Robinson "alleges she was wrongfully terminated under the Texas Supreme Court's 1985 opinion in Sabine Pilot Services v. Hauck for failing to commit an illegal act," recounts Texas Lawyer. "Robinson also brings battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress causes of action, alleging she was subject to a hostile work environment. She seeks unspecified actual and punitive damages."

Earlier coverage:

ABAJournal.com: "Big PI Lawyer a ‘Sexual Predator’ Who Cheated Clients, Ex-Staffer Says"

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by anon - 1 month, 5 days, 8 hours, 26 minutes ago

why is this ridiculous? If he wasn’t creating a hostile work environment then he should file for summary judgment. If he was what difference does it make that he was a lawyer?
Posted by Filk Bahr - 1 month, 2 days, 19 hours, 9 minutes ago

Of course defendent will say “ridiculous” whether true or untrue. When there is enough evidence, it is not ridiculous. Judge will decide.

Commenting has expired on this post.

ABA Journal - Law News Now

Tort Law