Above the Law - A Legal Tabloid - News, Gossip, and Colorful Commentary on Law Firms and the Legal Profession - Blogroll

Add RSS RSS


Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Our Interview with the Plaintiff

Aaron Brett Charney headshot.jpgAs we reported earlier today, Aaron Charney, an openly gay associate at Sullivan & Cromwell, is suing his firm for discrimination and retaliation. He filed his Complaint (PDF) in New York Supreme Court this morning. He alleges, among other things, that S&C partner Eric Krautheimer threw a document at his feet and told him to "bend over and pick it up -- I'm sure you like that."

Earlier this afternoon, we reached out to both Aaron Charney and a Sullivan & Cromwell spokesperson, by email. We haven't heard back from S&C; but Charney did give us a call.

We interviewed Mr. Charney about his lawsuit against Sullivan & Cromwell, his continued employment at the firm, and related matters. He struck us as intelligent, earnest, fair-minded, and thoughtful. Also, he has a very nice speaking voice.

A summary of our interview with Aaron Charney appears after the jump.

We didn't tape record the interview, and our note-taking wasn't perfect. So we may subsequently correct or modify what appears below if it comes to our attention that we erred.

We first confirmed with Charney that he remains at Sullivan & Cromwell, in its legendary corporate department. He's still there. We asked him how his work at the firm is going.

"It's going okay, from a work perspective. I'm continuing to work on big deals."

"Obviously the last year has been tough for me. I've been dealing with some people who have done terrible things, and I've been having to deal with the stress of that in addition to my work."

We asked Charney if he is looking for employment elsewhere. He said that he is not; he has been preoccupied with the lawsuit.

We explored Charney's motivation for filing suit.

"I'm doing what I can to shine light on a serious problem. I'm trying to be brave and stand up for what's right."

We confirmed that he's representing himself in the lawsuit (i.e., proceeding pro se). We asked if he considered retaining counsel, and he said that he did. But then he added:

"There are many impediments that make other lawyers unwilling to take a case like this. Many attorneys are afraid of picking a public fight with S&C."

"Some lawyers I spoke with wanted to resolve this dispute non-publicly and behind the scenes, instead of taking the opportunity to draw attention to an important problem. But I wanted it to be handled in a way that drew attention to the issue."

We asked whether Charney has previously worked on matters relating to workplace discrimination against gays. He said that he hasn't -- that he's not an activist in this area.

"I'm just an average person. I wouldn't call myself on the forefront of these issues."

"Sometimes events find you, and you have to make a choice. People in positions of power and authority shouldn't be able to stamp out other people based on their sexual orientation, their national origin, or any other such characteristic."

Playing devil's advocate, we asked Charney whether the treatment he claims to have suffered at Sullivan & Cromwell couldn't just be considered the standard "hazing" that young associates go through at big law firms. After all, working for Biglaw isn't a walk in the park.

Charney responded:

"Everyone know that there are partners at big law firms that can be difficult to work for. But there are things that cross the line."

"Sometimes there can be a fine line [between the proper and improper]. But in my case that line was crossed a long time ago."

Earlier: Charney v. Sullivan & Cromwell: Does S&C Hate Gays (and Canadians)?


TrackBack

Use this Trackback URL for this entry:
http://www.dealbreaker.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/4266

Comments

Good for him. I was there this summer, and I don't doubt his complaints are accurate.

Xoxo, is your assessment of Charney based only on his complaint or did you know of him before today?

And yes I know it's spelled salacious.

Not that your rant is worthy of even this much attention, but why can't you limit it to criticizing Charney. Why are you expanding it to homosexuals? I know lots of gays who haven't sued their firms.

XOXO,

You sound like you could be one of the homophobes who works at S&C. Why don't you post your real name and show us that you are not. In any case, you clearly are: 1) a bigot, 2) unfamiliar with the legal system (you embrace everything as true that S&C has alleged in response to Charney's complaint and yet they have not even filed any papers in court); 3) forgetting that perhaps people like Charney (or maybe even Charney himself) are willing to die for their country too except that the homophobic powers that be won't allow it (don't ask, don't tell is complete B.S.); 4) ignorant of the fact that a complaint (along with all legal filings in general) are public documents - Charney may have made his complaint more widely available but this would have come out in the press anyway; 5) evidently the BigLaw expert (sarcasm noted); 6) are a complete and total jerk. You are making personal attacks instead of commenting on the substance of the complaint. If you are a lawyer (and heaven help us all if you are), you need to go back to law school or stay out of the profession entirely. And I hope you get expose for the arrogant bigot that you are.

Awesome comeback re: the gays in military thing. PWNED!

This is an historic legal case. The "good-ol-boys-n-girls" in-house behaviors (read unlawful) will only be seconded by another soon-to-be revealed, high-profile case in NY. Who's to say his pro se isn't being monitored/coordinated by tangential powerhouse legal counsel? Often the real movers and shakers remain as the bete noire for the long-term and wide-spread effects. This is more than David v Goliath. This is life-altering to the straight-closet of subtle homophobia and overt hate crimes. This posit furthers a much-overdue dialogue and sets pathes for legal provisions.

As XOXO's response was the first thing I saw after reading the article, I am SO glad that I continued on, and saw some of the responses.

The anger, violence and, let's be honest, psychosis, displayed by XOXO's response made my heart skip a beat.

As I sit here typing this, I'm just hoping beyond hope that he doesn't work for my firm...

Xoxo, have you ever had anyone tell you to bend over and take it, or any such comment? Just curious.

XOXO,

Do you harass gays at your firm?

Do you make ignorant and demeaning statements to them or about them at work?

What is your name?

The one thing I hate more than any other is a stupid, fearful, coward bigot.

XOXO fits the bill.