Legal News

Duke to Lax Players: You?re Hurting our Reputation!

By Dan Slater

Back in February, we noted that a group of non-indicted Duke University lacrosse players had sued Duke, Durham and several school and police officials in federal court in North Carolina for fraud, abuse and breach of duty for supporting the prosecution of the case against their three falsely-accused teammates. (Click here for the complaint, in which they seek damages for invasion of privacy, emotional distress and other injuries.) At the time, Duke’s GC, Pamela Bernard, said: “Their legal strategy — attacking Duke — is misdirected and without merit.”

Now that strategy, which includes a Web site, dukelawsuit.com, has itself become the subject of a dispute between the players and the University, the city of Durham and the Duke University Health System, which have objected in federal court to the site — a blog that tracks the suit and includes links to all the filings. Here’s the NLJ story.

The defense lawyers, according to the report, say the site violates rules of the North Carolina Professional Conduct and is likely to prejudice proceedings. In court papers, the lawyers said the site “is aimed at attacking the character, credibility, and reputation of the Duke Defendants.”

Lawyers for the 38 Duke lax players, led by Chuck Cooper, of D.C.’s Cooper & Kirk, filed an opposing brief, saying the rule doesn’t apply to civil cases and that most of the information on the site is available through public records. They said the city officials’ attempt to silence the players “gives a new meaning to the concept of gall,” and pointed out that city officials fueled negative publicity about the players when the case surfaced in 2006.

Reginald B. Gillespie, of Durham’s Faison & Gillespie, who is representing Durham in the suit, told the NLJ he doesn’t comment on pending litigation.

LB readers, what do you think of the Duke plaintiffs’ Web site? Is there anything unethical or, short of that, unseemly, about it? Or are the defendants making a mountain out of a molehill?

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on April 10, 2008 (boomark / email).