I have written extensively about the TransPerfect case, how it was adjudicated, appearances of impropriety and conflicts of interest that I clearly perceive to exist, and the apparent, and in my view, incestuous situation that has developed over the years in Delaware’s “Good Ole Boy” legal system, seemingly protected by the Delaware Bar Association and the Legislature alike.
I have even written an article about what I think a good Delaware Judge should be like and the qualifications needed to be fair and effective. Frankly, I do not think Andre Bouchard should be a Chancellor, nor should Leo Strine have been a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. For the record, Bouchard and Strine were former business partners in the infamous Skadden Arps firm. One thing for sure, the job of any Judge whether in Delaware or elsewhere is to be fair and impartial. Anything less than that is a form of corruption in my opinion. Never should lawyers, who are friends and former business partners of the presiding Judge, be allowed to enrich themselves through litigation and biased rulings.
That is what I think happened in the TransPerfect case and it is still going on: The purpose of Delaware’s Chancery Court is to dispense equity and fairness, never to enhance those who are or have been personally connected to the Judge. Similarly, Delaware’s Supreme Court, where appeals are considered is also supposed to be unbiased with the recusal of Justices who have possible conflicts of interest. Indeed, I have concluded that conflicts of interest from what I have observed in the TransPerfect case both in the Chancery and in the Delaware Supreme Court might actually exist.
Having observed what I believe are Andre Bouchard’s appearances of impropriety as Delaware’s Chancellor, I was struck and dismayed by the arrogance and rudeness exhibited by Chief Justice Strine in his treatment of esteemed litigator Alan Dershowitz, who was representing Shirley Shawe in the TransPerfect appeal. The upholding of Bouchard’s subjective ruling by Strine et al was flawed in my view and was seemingly an obvious rubber stamp for Bouchard’s unprecedented sanctions and biased rulings. Justice Karen Valihura in her dissent called the Chancery Court’s ruling an illegal “Taking” under the 5th amendment. Regardless, I was concerned by Strine’s apparent superior attitude and in my view pompous administration of his position.
What constitutes conflicts of interest and the need for recusal by the Judge in any legal proceeding? From the National Legal Institute, I was able to glean the following: 1) Any justice, judge, or magistrate shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. 2) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding. 3) Where in private practice, he served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law and served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it. 4) Where he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.
I was recently contacted by Mr. James Martin, who was once a New Jersey lawyer. He apparently became a victim of an accident while riding his bike, lost his cases in lower courts and claims he was unable to appeal, because of Leo Strine’s conflicts of interest and failure to legally recuse himself. I interviewed Mr. Martin and to be absolutely sure to present his complaint accurately I insisted he give me his story in writing which I have preserved and documented in my archives.
According to Martin, to put it simply, Leo Strine failed to recuse himself when he should have, due to the fact that when he was serving as a government lawyer for then-Governor Carper, there were apparently overlapping issues involving the request for paneling temporary jurists to hear his appeal, because the official justices had already recused themselves. As I understand it, Martin feels that Strine prevented that from happening, creating an ongoing conflict of interest later on, when his appeal was tabled by Strine who refused to recuse himself when presented with absolute documentation of the legal grounds for his recusal. Mr. Martin sent me Strine’s official comment: “Indeed, I had no recollection of the 1996 correspondence until Mr. Martin’s motion brought it up, and even reviewing the letter [which bears my signature] now did not restore any memory of it. I am therefore satisfied that I can hear this matter free of bias.”
Well, folks, I say why not recuse himself and give Martin the benefit of any doubt?? The law is clear in that if there is any possible disparity or doubt, the Judge should recuse. Not Strine, who chose instead to be an ongoing negative force in Martin’s life. In the most recent case, Mr. Martin renewed the Motion to Recuse CJ Strine while he was active earlier this year on the Supreme Court of Delaware. He issued no decision on the Motion, even though it was filed within a few days after the appeal was docketed, and before any briefing. Instead, the case was closed, and the issue about whether a Motion to Recuse may be disregarded, without abridging a party’s due process, constitutional right, is currently docketed in the Supreme Court, at “No. 19-674.”
Folks, the bottom line is, according to James Martin, and if his forwards to me are accurate, Leo Strine had a duty to recuse himself. Indeed, by not doing so he created an unworthy and unjust situation for James Martin. Interestingly, this case is still before the Delaware Supreme Court and it is my understanding there is no statute of limitations. It is also my understanding that this case is in the Guinness Book of World Records as the longest pending case in U.S. history? The bottom line here is that a man who was entitled to a fair hearing and a fair appeal apparently did not get one? Strine, in his apparent arrogance, if indeed Mr. Martin is correct in his claims, did not allocate proper justice.
Leo Strine has recently resigned from the Supreme Court, six years before his term is up. Perhaps, all things considered, it was for the best and I say good riddance. I would be happy to see Andre Bouchard depart as Chancellor as well. As for Mr. Martin, good luck with your pending appeal. Maybe under Chief Justice Seitz, you will receive your long-awaited equity.
As always your comments are welcome and appreciated.
It should concern all of us that news of corruption in our once proud state of Delaware has again spread to the Spanish newspaper (see the translated story below)! We should all be embarrassed that Delaware has continuously attracted negative attention around the world. Read the shameful story below and let me know if you are as embarrassed as I am about this overseas coverage for Delaware.
Sincerely Yours,
JUDSON Bennett, Coastal Network
The TransPerfect case, one of the largest shareholder conflicts in the history of the United States, put more than 5,000 jobs worldwide at risk , 500 of them in the offices of Passeig de Gràcia in Barcelona.
The case has revealed the corruption that exists in the judicial institutions of the US State of Delaware, the original headquarters of TransPerfect until it had to flee to Nevada in search of a more fair treatment.
In recent years there has been a detailed follow-up of the different tricks used by the Delaware State Chancellery , with Judge André Bouchard in the lead, to favor the “Old Boys” of Delaware. Practices that have made poor, opaque and manipulated management visible in favor of a powerful circle of people.
It is important to highlight the origin of the TransPerfect Case. This is the moment in which the judge decreed the forced sale of a private company with benefits, the more than 250 million dollars spent on lawyers and consultants at the request of Bouchard, the deliberate concealment of the files of the case once resolved or the unbundled bills paid to law firms related to the judge, which are still arriving five years later.
This battery of controversial actions has cost the State of Delaware a multitude of criticisms and complaints from different strata of American society. In recent years, Delaware has fallen from the first to the eleventh position in the ranking prepared by the United States Chamber of Commerce, which assesses the transparency and impartiality of states through surveys of businessmen, lawyers and citizens.
In addition to having suspended the valuation of the United States Public Integrity Center, the United States Department of Justice is investigating the judicial team that managed the company’s sale process for alleged discrimination during 2017, when the company was under its control. Also, an opinion poll published in recent months by the Slingshot Strategies agency has revealed widespread discontent on the part of the citizens of the State of Delaware with the management of the current government.
Given this situation of alleged corruption and clear government opacity, there are already thousands of voices that have spoken in favor of a more transparent government, judicial institutions that represent the population and not just the interests of a few.
Specifically, the Citizens for a Pro Business citizen association, which has championed the citizen struggle to return Delaware to the field of transparency and competitiveness, has activated a campaign in which through irony it focuses on the Court Supreme and especially in André Bouchard.
“If you bill millions as a business lawyer, you like spending thousands of dollars on fancy dinners and you like driving cars that cost five times more than the average Delaware citizen earns annually, it seems you are the perfect candidate to become a Judge of the Delaware Supreme Court, ”they say, and concludes the video with a resounding“ our Supreme Court should be representative of the people it serves ”
On the other hand, Shirley Shawe , a TransPerfect shareholder and one of the most critical voices with the management of Judge Bouchard, has also wanted to shed light on the situation and has funded a TV advertising campaign in the States of Iowa and New Hampshire with the objective of increasing the notoriety of the problem that plagues one of the most powerful judicial courts in the country.
The advertising piece presents US Senator Joe Biden and Harvard professor Elizabeth Warren in a 2005 parliamentary dispute. The piece, edited, and with a voiceover that highlights the message, presents the following dialogue:
“Are you suggesting that the Delaware Supreme Court is not a competent or transparent court? Right, Joe Biden! That is why it has been valued at position 48 of 50 by the Center for Public Integrity in fundamental areas such as transparency and accounting ”.
The piece also highlights some of the shortcomings of the Delaware Supreme Court such as having no cameras in courtrooms, not reporting the earnings of judges, not having traceability of administrative documents and not presenting restrictions on the incorporation of judges who come from from the private sector.
OPINION Dear friends, I can’t thank my readers enough for the massive overflow of responses sent to me after my recent article titled, “Is The Delaware News Journal’s First TransPerfect Article in Over Six Months: Accurate, a Puff Piece or ‘Fake News’? You Decide,” was published. I have enclosed 20 of your top comments and have removed the last names to protect your privacy. The previous article encompassed several issues, concerning Andre Bouchard’s Chancery Court, the new and completely outrageous “contempt of court” charges against TransPerfect (stay tuned for more in-depth coverage), the amazing political ads raising national awareness of issues in Delaware’s Chancery Court by TransPerfect stockholder Shirley Shawe, the mother of CEO Philip Shawe. She bravely calls out Bouchard for ageism, sexism and corruption. As I have said for years now, there exists a separate system of “law” that Bouchard’s Chancery Court applies to successful entrepreneurs like the Shawes to seemingly drain them dry — and the crony gravy train continues. My sources tell me Bouchard has scheduled another hearing, apparently to again improperly enrich Skadden Arps at TransPerfect’s expense on October 10th, and I am planing on live coverage! Folks, the bottom line, in my view, is that the Delaware Chancery Court’s archaic rules have created, at a minimum, appearances of impropriety, and at worst, outright corruption—and this is unprecedented. You can make a difference in 2020 by voting only for Delaware State Legislature Candidates who promise to take on court corruption and cronyism. The days of free millions to Kevin Shannon, Steven Lamb, Bob Pincus and Bouchard’s other pals must stop—and justice must be served folks. That’s how I see it and what I’m advocating. Again, I thank you for your many comments; please keep them coming! Sincerely yours, JUDSON Bennett-Coastal Network SCROLL DOWN: 1) From Walt: “Judson Bennett’s Coastal Network”, “Citizens for Pro Business Delaware”, and Incessant Legal Action by the Shawe’s, and now Mrs. Shawe is sending out political ads against Biden. Delaware has never seen anything like this before. People are talking. WALT 2) From Lynn: Can’t wait to see Mrs Shawe’s ads against Biden? We appreciate all you do for Delaware. You are a wonderful writer with no fear. – Lynn 3) From Sam: How can they continue billing without explanation ? Andre Bouchard is destroying Delaware’s reputation. There should never be a question about the Chancery Court’s integrity. You are definitely making a difference. Can’t wait to see the ads ! Keep it up buddy. Best, Sam 4) From Alan: The News Journal article seems to capture the essence of the whole picture. Probably fairly accurate with a slight spin in favor of the Chancery. I sure hope Bouchard does not get the Supreme Court. He is bad news. Can’t help admiring their persistence. Attack ads on Biden- Really amusing!! 5) From Dave: Jud, keep beating the drum—you are the talk of Dover-LOL DAVE 6) From Jim: Thanks for the information Judson. Typical News Journal article with its establishment spin. Keep the articles coming. The article does not hurt the Shawes and frankly it brings more attention. Fascinating business. JIM 7) From Patty: Bouchard is up for Supreme Court Chief Justice, we have got to prevent that somehow! Maybe the controversy with TransPerfect and all the negative publicity you put out about him will keep it from happening. We in Sussex all know the power of your pen. You have certainly helped people win and made people lose. Keep up the great work. Delaware loves you Jud! Patty B. 8) From Joe: Jud, I think the piece covers it accurately, maybe with a little bias? Quite a story! 9) From Tim: Judson, Delaware is not used to someone using the power of advertising and activists to change a situation in the Courts. I have a hunch the powers to be are getting nervous. Thanks for all you do. Tim 10) From Pete: Judson, Sounds like CEO Philip Shawe and “Mommy Dearest” don’t mess around. Fascinating stuff and you have done an amazing job on this entire expose’. You gonna get the movie rights? PETE 11) From Jack: Wow! Quite an article—Lot of Puff and spin for the dark side. LOL Love your articles. Best regards, Jack 12) From Dick: Thanks for sending. The appearance of irregularities in this incessant case are very disconcerting. The Shawes are to be commended in my opinion and if they can make a difference. I am all for it and glad. Good job buddy. Dick 13) From Scott: Jud, Biden has lost it. He is a total insipid character now without substance. I rate the piece as a puff piece. The Shawes really got screwed by Bouchard. He has got to go! Keep it up and thank you. Scott 14) From Elsie: Judson, Delaware should be attacked by the Shawes and especially Biden—YOU GO MRS SHAWE!—WOMAN POWER 15 From Laurie: Hi Jud, Quite an article, I like the way you presented it this time. Usually by the time I read your communication above the article, I don’t read the article. The News Journal is definitely putting a negative spin on it. What a mess-Delaware needs to fix this crap, but as long as the Dems have the power, it will only get worse. Keep up the good work. We love your articles. L, Laurie 16) From John: Amazing stuff, Delaware is corrupt and the News Journal is suborning the corruption as it always does! 17) From Bill: Judson, The Delaware we once knew is no more. The establishment is going to protect itself and the News Journal is a liberal rag! Best to you, Bill 18) From Alan: Biden stinks-such an empty suit. Good for Mrs. Shawe. Alan 19) From Jim: Biden is responsible for changing the Bankruptcy laws which screwed everybody and protected the credit card companies. Mrs. Shawe is a little off on her political ads , however there are ads playing from that Pro Delaware Citizens group all over the radio. The media, the legislature, and the corrupt judiciary are all in it together. Keep up the good work. Jim 20) From Sarah: Like the national liberal press, they embellish and spin it the way they want it. Thanks for sending. – SarahI’m going to keep this short, folks, because I want you to read the newest story in the Delaware News Journal about TransPerfect, which I have been writing about for the last few years. I’ve read the story twice and I’d love to hear your opinion. It seems to me that sadly, Bouchard and his good-old-boy network, who continue to take money from TransPerfect every month still — 2 years after the sale — are powerful enough to influence News Journal coverage. Read the story below and see if you agree that the Shawes, who are courageous enough to take on Chancery Court corruption using the Democratic Primary as a backdrop, are portrayed as the antagonist. I say they are really the victims, and they have been month after month to this very day of Skadden Arps continued court-ordered looting — for nothing of value in my view and in the view of employees — but this is sealed up, so how can we really know? Read below, and as always, I look forward to your feedback.
Republican businesswoman behind $500,000 Joe Biden attack ads explains she was furious he supported ‘corrupt’ Chancery Court that dissolved her business costing her millions
Political unknown Shirley Shawe paid for the TV ads in Iowa and New Hampshire to show next week Shawe shared with DailyMail.com the ad is to ‘raise public awareness to the serious issues plaguing America’s most powerful business court’ It is the largest third-party attack ad spend so far in the 2020 campaign The ad includes a 2005 exchange between then Senator Biden and Elizabeth Warren – at-the-time a Harvard professor – as they discussed bankruptcy reform But the ad dices up the dialogue between the two and suggests that they were speaking on the Chancery Court Transcripts from the hearing reveal that Biden had just misspoke and confused bankruptcy courts with the Chancery Court, a point he later clarifies Both Warren and Biden have called for the ad to be pulled from the air Shawe seems to be angry about a business dispute that impacted her son in 2015, more than ten years after the political exchange took placeBy MATTHEW WRIGHT FOR DAILYMAIL.COM and KEITH GRIFFITH FOR DAILYMAIL.COM
PUBLISHED: 14:52 EDT, 29 August 2019 | UPDATED: 16:15 EDT, 29 August 2019 A Republican entrepreneur who released a perplexing ad decrying Joe Biden’s relationship with the Delaware Chancery Court has explained that she was angry at the presidential candidate for supporting the court that dissolved her business – costing her millions. Shirley Shawe told DailyMail.com that she released the misleading advert as a means to ‘raise public awareness to the serious issues plaguing America’s most powerful business court.’ ‘I was a personal victim of ageism, sexism, and corruption at the hands of Delaware Chancellor Andre Bouchard over the last five years; my constitutional rights were trampled and my private property was seized by a Delaware government body and put up for auction-and part of the justification for this was my age,’ she claimed in a statement to DailyMail.com. She added the behavior was ‘typical of the “Old Boy’s Club” that runs Delaware.’ ‘The Chancellor turned simple board deadlock into a 3 year occupation of the company I am part owner of, and caused over $250 million to be spent on the case, much of which directly benefited his social circle in Delaware. Bouchard was sworn in as Chancellor in 2014, five years after Biden ended his time as Senator of Delaware and almost a decade after the footage Shawe used in her advert. Shawe clarified that she sought to ‘encourage the candidates to drive reform’ with her ad that correctly identifies Delaware as getting an ‘F’ grade from the 2015 State Integrity Investigation that looks at ‘state government accountability and transparency.’ The ad includes a 2005 exchange between then Senator Biden and Elizabeth Warren – at-the-time a Harvard professor – as they discussed bankruptcy reform. ‘The Delaware court is too male, too white and anything but open,’ the ad’s narrator asserts in the advertisement. In the ad, Biden speaks on how the Chancery Court are open and calls it ‘outrageous’ to suggest otherwise. The clip then shows Warren ‘responding’ and seemingly pointing out how the Chancery Court impacts Delaware workers. But, the clip actually chops up Warren’s entire comment and fails to contextualize Biden’s comment – especially once he realizes that the conversation is about bankruptcy courts and not the Chancery Court. A transcript from the hearing shows that Biden realized his mistake and focused on Bankruptcy. Chancery was only ever mentioned in his initial comment. ‘Employees of companies like Enron literally cannot go to Delaware and hire local counsel, which the Delaware bankruptcy court requires of them before they can make an appearance, and that effectively cuts thousands of small employees, pensioners and local trade creditors out of the bankruptcy process,’ Warren said in the entirety of her quote. ‘If they can’t afford it, they are not there.’ Both Biden and Warren demanded the ad to be pulled, with the former Vice President declaring that the advert mischaracterized his remarks. Shawe shared that she was ‘disappointed’ by the politicians reaction but added that it was not ‘unexpected’ for Biden to respond in that way ‘given his home state court’s attempt to silence me and treat me as less than a person for years.’ She continued: ‘It is typical of the “Old Boy’s Club” that runs Delaware.’ ‘For Ms Warren, I suspect the Senator doesn’t yet fully understand how the Chancery Court harmed me and our 5000 workers worldwide. If she researches this case more deeply, I believe she will understand the facts and may have a different view.’ The Republican apparent endorsement of Warren – as seen on the ad – happens to just fall on that particular issue. Shawe said ‘who knows’ when commenting on who she would support for other issues and added that she and Warren agreed on this particular one. ‘The court needs to be brought up to 2019 and needs transparency,’ she stated. ‘I will keep fighting for that. This is just the first in a planned effort to drive awareness.’ Shawe’s grudge seems to stem from a costly legal battle that her son’s translation company, TransPerfect, fought in Delaware’s chancery court in 2015. ‘Two years after the case has ended, my company is still be billed outrageous sums per month by Skadden Arps, the Chancellor’s and the Chief Justice’s former employers,’ said the businesswoman. ‘We are required to pay these bills by court order, yet we are not allowed to see them, or even know what this work is for.’ She plans to run the television ad in early primary states Iowa and New Hampshire next week in what is the largest third-party attack ad spend so far in the 2020 presidential race. The ad eschews mainstream campaign issues and instead focus on the Chancery Court, a legal system which Shawe blames for a business dispute that hurt her son’s company. ‘The Delaware court is too male, too white and anything but open,’ the ad’s narrator intones. The 60-second ad shows Biden during a 2005 Senate hearing, in which he debated Elizabeth Warren, then a Harvard law professor. The ad accuses Biden of defending the Chancery Court as Warren attacks it. The transcript of the hearing shows that Warren was actually speaking about the bankruptcy courts, a separate forum of equity law, but Biden became briefly confused and referred to chancery court. Delaware’s Court of Chancery oversees business disputes, though not bankruptcy, which is a federal matter. The state’s chancery court has great influence due to the large number of companies that are incorporated in Delaware, which has business-friendly laws. Both Biden and Warren, who are among top contenders for the Democratic presidential nomination, have called for the ad to be pulled. ‘The ad misrepresents Vice President Biden’s position in this exchange from 2005 by manipulating footage to suggest he means one court when he means another,’ Biden campaign national press secretary Jamal Brown told CBS News in a statement. ‘It’s a clear reminder of the way that third-party money poisons our politics with false attack ads, and it has no place in this race,’ he continued. Warren also spoke out against the ad, even though it seems to cast her in a heroic light. ‘Elizabeth does not believe individual donors should have an outsized influence in this primary, and has consistently said that Super PACs or individuals with the means to finance ad campaigns on their own should stay out of the primary,’ her deputy communications director Chris Hayden said. Shawe’s grudge seems to stem from a costly legal battle that her son’s translation company, TransPerfect, fought in Delaware’s chancery court in 2015. In a landmark case, the head of the Delaware Chancery, Chancellor Andre Bouchard, ordered the dissolution of the company even though it was not in financial distress, but because its co-owners could not get along. The court-ordered decision to sell TransPerfect came in 2015 after a chancellor concluded the feuding CEO’s Philip Shawe and Elizabeth Elting were ‘hopelessly deadlocked’ over significant matters and business decisions. Shirley Shawe owned 1 percent of the company at the time of the forced sale, which resulted in her son Philip Shawe gaining ownership by bidding in the public auction. Shirley Shawe launched a crusade against the chancery courts, however, lobbying lawmakers to banned forced sales like the one of TransPerfect. ‘When a judge makes a precedent and makes a ruling to just sell a privately held company, then why would other people be motivated to start a company and why would they be motivated to incorporate in the state of Delaware? If someone is just going to take their private property?’ Shawe told WMDT-TV in 2017. Shawe has said through a spokesperson that she is a Republican and did not intend to boost Warren with her ad. She has vowed to run to run the TV ads in spite of the candidates’ protests, and has also reportedly ordered print newspaper ads on the subject.