|
|||||
 |
Gordon & Simmons, LLC: Michael Richman, Washington Times,
“The man who would smite the New
York Times: Frederick lawyer Roger Simmons ‘in it for long haul’ playing
David to the Goliath of journalism,” May 9, 1994: “Washington lawyer Peter Axelrad, who has argued prominent libel
cases, examined [Roger] Simmons’ winning brief, commending it enthusiastically. “’I’ve been involved in numerous libel cases, and I can say this
was a first-class brief,’ Mr. Axelrad says, praising ‘[Simmons’] use of
words, his ability to write and argue well on paper, his command of the
law.’ “Mr. Simmons has attracted reams of exposure through his part
in the case, being quoted regularly by national publications and appearing
on Court TV, where he debated Ken Starr, a former appeals court judge
and ex-solicitor general.” Oliver v. CNN, et al: Reese Schonfeld, Me and Ted Against
the World: The Unauthorized Story
of the Founding of CNN,” (New York:
HarperCollins, 2000), pages 310-312. “On January 17, 2000, Oliver, Moorer, Singlaub, and their lawyers
and associates met to take Admiral Moorer’s deposition. Throughout the morning, lawyers for the plaintiffs
lobbed easy questions at him, suggesting that [former CNN producer April]
Oliver had been harassing him and has misrepresented his answers in the
documentary. Then it was Roger
Simmons’s turn. “Oliver had hired Simmons, a gentlemanly country lawyer devoted
to history and the Constitution, out of Frederick, Maryland. She had spent her Christmas break with him,
reviewing documents. Immediately,
after the interviews with Moorer, she’d entered her notes into a computer
and kept handwritten originals. “Simmons knew that Admiral Moorer had great respect for history
and was a man of honor. He opened
by asking Moorer if he had said, ‘The difference between a democratic
and communist government is that in a democratic government we advertise
and discuss our faults and that in the communist government they cover
them up.’ Moorer agreed that he had. Then, Simmons talked Moorer through a brief
history of the Vietnam War, and discussed Moorer’s distinguished military
career. “Finally, Simmons presented Moorer with a computer printout of
April Oliver’s handwritten notes from their interviews. Question by question, Simmons asked the Admiral
if the notes fairly reflected Moorer’s recollections of his conversations
with Ms. Oliver. Time after time,
the Admiral agreed that the notes were accurate. His answers indicated that Oliver had quoted
him correctly about Operation Tailwind.
Moorer admitted that sometimes defectors were killed and that he
had been told by Singlaub that killing defectors was a priority. When asked about the use of sarin, the poison
gas, Moorer said, ‘If the weapon [sarin] could save American lives, I
would never hesitate to use it.’ “Moorer seemed to have confirmed the two basic points of Operation
Tailwind. One, that some American
defectors in Laos had been killed, and two, that sarin had been used to
rescue American pilots. After
Moorer’s deposition, it was apparent that CNN’s retraction was premature,
cowardly, and dead wrong. “CNN’s lawyers were delighted. It was obvious that April Oliver had information from Moorer that
supported the accusations made in Valley
of Death. At 5:15, as the
group broke for recess, General Singlaub’s lawyer said to Simmons, ‘You’ve
just gutted everyone’s case.’ “Following the deposition, Judge Joan Zeldon sent the parties
to mediation. Roger Simmons’s
heart intervened: he underwent
triple bypass surgery, and the mediator granted an adjournment. Finally, on May 26 and 27, April Oliver and Roger Simmons met with
the Time Warner in-house lawyers, and with Nicole Seligman and Kevin Baine
of Williams & [Connolly], the powerhouse Washington law firm. Seligman had represented President Clinton
during his impeachment. Time, or its insurance company, was using
the best lawyers in town. No one
from CNN was present. No one from
Time magazine was present. There was only one journalist in the room,
April Oliver, and she walked away with the money. I think of it as a triumph for the news side. “Under the terms of the settlement, neither Oliver nor Simmons
can give an exact figure, but Oliver had sued CNN for $5 million. She pretty much proved her case, and, incidentally,
she may have saved CNN and Time
a lot of money in damages that, thanks to the Moorer deposition, they
may not have to pay to the other plaintiffs. “As they sat down for their final negotiations, Oliver and Simmons
had the gun. Good lawyers know
how to negotiate when they have the edge, and I’m sure April took home
a basketful of dollars. I don’t
think Roger Simmons is the kind of lawyer who leaves money on the table. April also got some satisfaction. She’s told the Associated Press that she wants,
‘The public record restored . . . so I’m not buried under a sea of character
assassination and a sea of disinformation.’ “Time Warner had played their cards cleverly. The settlement was announced late on a Friday
afternoon. Few papers picked it
up, and those that did gave it just a couple of paragraphs. Oliver deserves better treatment.“ Haft v. Klein, et al. Alison Frankel, American Lawyer,
“In Too Deep,” November 1994. “On September 2, just days after Klein sent out the notice of
the special Crown board meeting to consider the Marshall employment contract,
Ronald [Haft] sued Klein and Wilmer, alleging a breach of fiduciary duty
and seeking to compel Wilmer to turn over its files and to enjoin Klein
and Wilmer from representing Herbert [Haft] or any of the businesses without
Ronald’s written consent. Ronald
is represented in the case by [Roger] Simmons of Gordon & Simmons,
LLC, a former Howrey & Simon partner. . . .
“Simmons filed an amended
complaint against Klein and Wilmer, alleging malpractice, breach of contract,
and other claims, in addition to breach of fiduciary duty. The amended complaint demands more than $200
million in compensatory and punitive damages. “’[Klein] is still advocating interests—whether he’s representing
Dart, Crown, [or] Herbert’s, he’s acting contrary to the best interests
of Ronald,’ argues Simmons, whom Klein has called ‘a junkyard dog.’ .
. . “ Global Relief Foundation v. New York Times, Associated Press, ABC, and
Boston Globe, et al. Michael Orey, Wall Street Journal,
“Islamic Charity Sues Media Companies for Defamation,” November 19, 2001. “In its complaint, [Global Relief] states it believes that ‘no
government source exists for any of the claims made by each of the defendants.’
Roger Simmons, Global Relief’s lead lawyer in the case, says he
hopes the very filing of the suit will put the media on notice that they
need to be more careful. “’This group does a whole lot of things . . . to make sure it’s
not being illicitly used for terrorist organizations,’ says Matthew Simmons,
another of Global Relief’s attorneys.
‘We need to clear our client’s name.’ . . . “Matthew Simmons said he hopes the court will determine that
Global Relief is a ‘private figure,’ which would require it to show only
negligence. But he said the case
doesn’t depend on that. . . . “’We are prepared for that possibility,” Roger Simmons says,
adding that Global Relief has nothing to hide.” Global Relief Foundation v. Paul H. O’Neill, Colin L. Powell, John Ashcroft,
R. Richard Newcomb, and Robert S. Mueller, III: Laurie Cohen and Kim Barker, Chicago
Tribune, “Local Islamic charity on terror list,” October 19, 2002. “Roger Simmons, an attorney for Global Relief [Foundation], blasted
the Treasury Department’s move as a ‘political reaction’ by the Bush administration
in response to recent terrorist attacks. “’They designated us because they needed to look like they were
doing something,’ Simmons said. ‘
. . . It’s against the wrong people, at the wrong time, for the wrong
reasons.’ . . . [G]overnment officials ‘have never pointed to one nickel
that ever went from Global Relief’s bank account or pocketbook to Al Qaeda’s
pocketbook.’” John Mintz, Washington Post,
“U.S. Labels Muslim Charity as Terrorist Group,” October 19, 2002. “Lawyers for Global Relief and its co-founder, Rabih Haddad,
denounced the government’s action as anti-Muslim and McCarthyist. . .
. “’The United States also supported that organization [Makhtab al-Khidamat] then,’ said the foundation’s Maryland-based attorney, Roger Simmons. ‘None of this was illegal at the time, and it’s Orwellian now to say it is. This is revisionist history.’” Listen to a December 12, 2002, report about the Global Relief
Foundation on NPR's All Things Considered, which includes an interview
with Roger Simmons. | ||||
| . |