Workers' bias suit ends in win, slur

The Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | Posted on Tue, Dec. 20, 2005 | By John Shiffman, Inquirer Staff Writer

[sportutegrl]

Four white men fired by the Philadelphia School District have won a racial-discrimination lawsuit, and a federal jury awarded them nearly $3 million in damages. After Friday's verdict, Carl E. Singley, a prominent African American lawyer who represented the school district, exchanged words with some members of the all-white jury as they rode a courthouse elevator. He called them "crackers," four jurors said in interviews. Within 30 minutes, U.S. District Judge Harvey Bartle 3d brought Singley and five of the seven jurors in the case back into his courtroom. Singley, a former Temple Law School dean, promptly apologized. "What I did and said was inappropriate," Singley said, according to a transcript. "I should not have disrespected you, and I do apologize." Reached yesterday, Singley declined to comment. In a statement last night, the school district's chief executive officer, Paul Vallas, said he had not yet spoken with Singley about the elevator incident but planned to pursue the matter. "If the statement is true it is outrageous and hurtful to us all," Vallas said. The unusual post-verdict hearing came at the end of a two-week trial during which the four white men alleged that they were wrongfully fired from the district's purchasing department in 2003. They alleged reverse racial discrimination and said that the district's chief purchasing officer, Kimberly Sangster, retaliated when the men initially complained of discrimination. "What we stressed to the jury is that the law in America is that equal opportunity in employment applies to everyone," said lawyer Michael D. Homans, who represented the four plaintiffs with Lizanne V. Hoerst. "You can't discriminate against anyone based on race - white people, black people, Hispanics. Discrimination infected the decision-making of Kim Sangster."

[On the Road to Serfdom]

I think they have rules of conduct they must abide by at all times, even outside of trials. Plus, the fact that this was communication with the jurors makes it related to the case (though I don't think that is a necessary condition for a lawyer to break ethics rules.)

[GreenLanternCorps]

He is an Officer of the Court and this matter, even though it was outside the trial, was directly related to his position as an officer of the court.

[connectthedots]

He is an Officer of the Court and this matter, even though it was outside the trial, was directly related to his position as an officer of the court.

Lawyers are not officers of the court when they are representing clients. They are independent agents acting on behalf of their clients. The USSC has stated exactly that.

[sportutegrl]

I also believe in freedom of speech, and think the judge should not have made it an issue. But since it is out there, we can see how hypocricital these race baiters are. We have a lawyer trying to prove that the local government does not discriminate against whites, but he himself calls them crackers. It is so deliciously ironic.