Sunday, June 28, 2015

Another Letter to Loretta

June 29, 2015
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Apartment 136
Washington, DC  20008

The Honroable Karl A. Racine
Attorney General of the District of Columbia
Government of the District of Columbia
One Judiciary Square
441 Fourth Street, NW
Washington, DC  20001

RE:  Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998)

Dear Mr. Racine:

Enclosed are several additional documents, all part of the record on appeal in the above-referenced matter, that highlight peculiarities in my job termination by the law firm of Akin, Gump, Starauss, Hauer & Feld: a job termination that formed the basis of a determination by the U.S. Social Security Administration that I became disabled and eligible for government benefits effective October 29, 1991, the date of termination.

Please keep the following chronology in mind:

October 29, 1991:  I was terminated by senior counsel Dennis M. Race, Esq. at a meeting in Race's office attended by my direct supervisor (Chris Robertson) and the personnel administrator (Laurel Digweed).

February 4, 1992: The D.C. Department of Human Rights issued an unlawful termination complaint pursuant to the D.C. Human Rights Act

May 22, 1992:  The employer (Akin Gump) filed with DHR its Response to Interrogatories and Document Request stating, “When terminated, [Claimant] was told that his actual work product was not a problem.”

September 1992:  I filed two letters with DHR detailing the events of the job termination without knowledge of the employer's Response.

December 23, 1992:  I received from DHR (via USPS registered mail) at my residence a copy of the employer's Response.

The following documents show that the termination meeting on October 29, 1991 featured a considerable amount of game playing by an Akin Gump senior attorney manager (Dennis M. Race, Esq.), game playing that is not entirely consistent with a good faith termination.

1.  Letter from Gary Freedman to DHR dated September 25, 1992 in which I admitted that Race told me that my personnel file contained written statements detailing various infractions and instances of misconduct I had engaged in during my tenure.  Race deliberately lied about said statements.  Upon receipt of Akin Gump's Response on December 23, 1992 I learned that my personnel file contained no such written statements [R. 132].

2.  Akin Gump Response dated May 22, 1992 states: "During his tenure, Claimant was not given a formal written reprimand.  However, Respondent's concern about his inability to interact with co-workiers and volatile behavior were addressed by his immediate supervisor, Chrstine Robertson (caucasian/female) during several conferences with Claimant [R. 132].  In fact, my personnel record (Performance Evaluations or other documents) contains no contemporaneous memorial of any such conferences.  The only memorial of such "conferences" is a retaliatory memo dated October 25, 1991 [R. 369-70], written by my supervisor (Robertson) the day after I complained about her.  See Jeppsen v. Wunnicke, 611 F. Supp. 78, 82 (D.C. Alaska 1985) (a harassment complaint will more likely than not yield diametrically opposed statements from the complaining employee and the alleged offending supervisor and coworkers).  Note that said memo states that my work performance was "exemplary" [R. 369].

3.  Letter from Gary Freedman to DHR dated September 17, 1992, a highly defensive communication in which I defend the quality of my work performance and am utterly silent as to any oral statements by Race at the termination meeting about my mental stability or volatile behavior with coworkers [R. 527-532].  It is a fundamental principle of human behavior that people become defensive about things they have been accused of and remain silent as to things they were never accused of.  Clearly, said letter is persuasive circumstantial evidence that I was told by Race that the main reason for my termination was poor work performance: that the employer was silent as to psychological or emotional reasons for the termination and silent as to volatile behavior.


Gary Freedman 

cc:  U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch

No comments: