Risk Update

Conflicts Allegations Rejected — No Conflict in Bribery Case, Judicial Campaign Donation Doesn’t Merit Recusal

Posted Dan Bressler

“No Conflict For Ballard Spahr In Ex-Union Leader’s Bribe Case” —

  • “A Pennsylvania federal judge on Tuesday [7/2] rejected a claim by former Philadelphia union leader and convicted felon John ‘Johnny Doc’ Dougherty that his Ballard Spahr LLP defense team marred its representation of him in a bribery prosecution because of a conflict of interest with Comcast.”
  • “The ruling, by U.S. District Judge Jeffrey L. Schmehl of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, came two days before Dougherty is set to be sentenced following his convictions for bribing Bobby Henon when Henon was a Philadelphia city councilman and embezzling from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 98, for which he worked as business manager for three decades.”
  • “Prosecutors said Dougherty used Henon to pressure Comcast into giving union workers fiber-optic work by stalling franchise agreement renewal negotiations with the city. Dougherty claimed that his lead Ballard Spahr attorney, Henry Hockeimer Jr., did not call top Comcast executive David Cohen as a witness and failed to effectively cross-examine company employee Kathleen Sullivan, who was privy to the negotiations, because he had represented Comcast previously.”
  • “However, Judge Schmehl said Dougherty failed to present evidence that pointed to divided loyalty on Hockeimer’s part. ‘Even if Mr. Hockeimer had some loyalty to Comcast due to his firm’s representation of the company in unrelated matters — and the court found above that he did not — Mr. Dougherty has not explained how that loyalty compelled Mr. Hockeimer to not call Mr. Cohen as a witness,’ Judge Schmehl said.”
  • “Judge Schmehl also said that Hockeimer elicited testimony from Sullivan that was favorable to Dougherty’s case, rejecting Dougherty’s argument that his former attorney should have pressed Sullivan as to whether she invited Dougherty to the negotiations, which, if true, would undercut the prosecution’s contention that the union leader was the driving force behind the meetings.”

“Young Thug, YSL Trial: Judge Krause denies motion to recuse herself” —

  • “Fulton County Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause has denied the motion to recuse herself from deciding whether a fellow judge should be removed from the massive racketeering trial of GRAMMY Award-winning rapper Young Thug (real name Jeffery Williams) and several of his associates.”
  • “Brian Steel, representing Young Thug, filed the motion based on two factors: Judge Glanville is a colleague, and he made a $2,000 campaign donation to Judge Krause in 2024.”
  • “In her denial, Judge Krause emphasized that the court must consider whether a motion for recusal is timely, legally sufficient, and if the affidavit sets forth facts warranting recusal.”
  • “Krause stated that the court found the motion timely and legally sufficient but determined that the donation does not warrant recusal as it was not exceptionally large and no additional facts were presented to demonstrate the need for recusal.”
  • “According to Krause, the Georgia Supreme Court and the Code of Judicial Conduct indicate that standard campaign contributions do not necessitate recusal unless additional compelling circumstances are demonstrated.”
  • “The court also found that Williams’ reference to the Judicial Qualification Commission Opinion 220 does not apply since Judge Glanville is neither a party nor counsel in the case.”
  • “Judge Krause did not address the fact that she and Judge Glanville are colleagues. However, she did point out that she was randomly assigned to the case.”