Skip to content
News
Link copied to clipboard

Lawyer in Eakin case says deal unlikely

Richard A. Sprague, the prominent Philadelphia lawyer serving as mediator in the judicial misconduct case against state Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin, suggested Monday that he was unlikely to succeed in brokering a deal to resolve the charges without a trial.

Prominent Philadelphia lawyer Richard A. Sprague (right) suggested Monday he was unlikely to succeed in brokering a deal to resolve the charges against Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin without a trial.
Prominent Philadelphia lawyer Richard A. Sprague (right) suggested Monday he was unlikely to succeed in brokering a deal to resolve the charges against Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin without a trial.Read moreAP, staff file

Richard A. Sprague, the prominent Philadelphia lawyer serving as mediator in the judicial misconduct case against state Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin, suggested Monday that he was unlikely to succeed in brokering a deal to resolve the charges without a trial.

Sprague offered that assessment in his first public comment since he was brought in to help in the case against Eakin, who was suspended from the high court in December for exchanging salacious, misogynistic, and racist emails.

Sprague said the state Court of Judicial Discipline, in quietly appointing him to the unpaid post last month, set conditions that made mediation almost impossible.

On Monday, he and the court made public a letter in which the tribunal stipulated that if Eakin agreed to a deal, its terms would have to be made public before the court accepted or rejected it.

"You are never going to get any agreements that way," Sprague said.

He said the requirement that Eakin and the Judicial Conduct Board - in effect, the justice's accuser - make public any proposed deal would open the door for critics to pressure the court to reject any settlement.

In the interview, Sprague, 90, one of Pennsylvania's top lawyers, dismissed criticism by state Attorney General Kathleen G. Kane and others who said his appointment as mediator amounted to special treatment for Eakin.

"They didn't know what they are talking about," Sprague said in an hour-long interview at his Center City office. "They are people who should know better. They don't know what the facts are."

Sprague and Salvatore Cognetti, the lawyer for the Court of Judicial Discipline in the Eakin case, said the panel had never before appointed a mediator in a case against a judge.

But Sprague said negotiation was routine in both civil and criminal legal matters.

In the Eakin case, he said, a deal would preclude appeals that could take years.

"If the two sides were to come to an agreement that the court itself felt rendered justice and did the right thing, that simplifies the whole process," he said. "It moves it quicker, gets it disposed of quicker, and that's in everybody's interest."

Critics have said Sprague faced a conflict because he represented Kane during a 2014 appearance before the Inquirer Editorial Board.

At the time, Kane was facing heavy criticism for shutting down an undercover corruption investigation that had caught elected officials in Philadelphia - all fellow Democrats - on tape taking money.

Sprague said his representation of Kane lasted only as long as she was in the Inquirer newsroom. "I only represented her for one g- hour," he said.

He added: "All I did was tell her to keep her mouth shut, which maybe would have been good advice for her on other matters as well."

On Sunday, Kane sharply criticized the judicial tribunal for appointing a mediator, calling it a move to sweep Eakin's "hate-filled emails under the rug."

Kane publicly accused the justice of sending offensive emails last fall, shortly after she was arraigned on a criminal charge.

She is awaiting trial on charges of perjury, obstruction, and other crimes. Prosecutors say she leaked grand jury documents to embarrass a critic whom she blamed for disclosing her decision to close the corruption probe without making any arrests.

Later, Kane ignited the email scandal after discovering that the computer servers in her office had been a hub for the exchange of pornographic and otherwise offensive emails by state officials, lawyers, judges and others.

After Kane made public Eakin's troubling emails, the Judicial Conduct Board charged the justice with misconduct. It cited 20 offensive emails he sent and about 100 he received, mocking women, minorities, immigrants, and others.

On Monday, Eakin's lawyer, William C. Costopoulos, rejected Kane's criticism of the court's decision to enlist a mediator as a "self-serving accusation" and accused her of meddling.

"She is not a party to the disciplinary process. She has no right to interfere with that process," he said.

Sprague, for his part, made public a Feb. 2 letter to the Court of Judicial Discipline in which he said that the conditions it set for mediation in the Eakin case were too stringent.

"In order to have effective mediation, the mediator must be able to have discussions with the court about the court's process," he wrote.

In a separate interview Monday, Cognetti said the court was moving forward with preparations to hold a public judicial trial for Eakin.

If the judicial panel were to find him guilty of an ethical breach, it could impose punishments ranging from a censure to ouster from the court. Removal could cost Eakin his pension.

Sprague said the Supreme Court had properly stayed out of the decision to hire him.

On Monday, Justice Christine Donohue said she was given no advance word of the appointment, echoing remarks from other justices on the court.

mfazlollah@phillynews.com

215-854-5831