Chicago Public Schools chief Pedro Martinez is alleging the firm representing the school board in an ongoing lawsuit has a conflict of interest that warrants disqualification.
Martinez’s lawyer, William Quinlan, filed a motion March 4 to “disqualify the law firm of Cozen O’Connor LLP.” Cozen serves as counsel for seven board members named in the lawsuit between the district’s outgoing chief executive officer and the Chicago Board of Education.
Martinez filed the lawsuit against the school board after he was fired Dec. 20 to block the then seven-member body from stripping him of his duties, including his involvement in contract negotiations with the Chicago Teachers Union. Several days after Martinez’s firing the board members attended ongoing contract negotiations with CTU on a new four-year contract that has yet to be settled. Martinez’s tenure as CPS chief will conclude in June.
It was the first time in 12 years that school board members attended a bargaining session. Typically, the schools chief and his team negotiate the contract and collaborate with the board.
However, Cozen also represents the members of a new, 21-member partially elected, partially appointed board, seated in January after Martinez was fired. The previous board that voted to fire Martinez was appointed by Mayor Brandon Johnson. Five of them remain on the board.
Quinlan argues in the motion that Cozen representing the new school board in addition to the board members who fired Martinez “raises an impermissible concurrent conflict of interest.”
At a Dec. 24 hearing, Cook County Circuit Judge Joel Chupack granted Martinez a temporary restraining order under the argument that the board wrongly fired the chief executive officer and obstructed his job duties by sitting in on bargaining. Board members are supposed to ask for the CEO’s permission before attending negotiations, Quinlan argued then.
The board has since filed a motion to dismiss the temporary restraining order. That motion to dismiss is currently under briefing — a process in which both parties submit written arguments to the court to explain the legal basis for their positions.
Quinlan spoke about the motion to disqualify Cozen O’Connor at a hearing in front of Chupack Monday.
“I don’t know how we can decide (the motion to dismiss the temporary restraining order) without deciding if there’s a conflict first,” he said.
Jeremy Glenn, Cozen O’Connor’s attorney, said that “the conflict, if it arose, hasn’t presented itself in a way that changes the legal arguments.”
He cited prior case law suggesting that a motion to disqualify “needs to be looked at carefully to make sure it’s not a tactic to delay a ruling on a motion to dismiss (the temporary restraining order).”
Cozen O’Connor did not respond to a request for further comment.
A conflict of interest exists if “the representation of one client will be adverse to another” or if “there is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the lawyer’s responsibilities to another client,” Quinlan’s motion argues.
In this case, the motion continues, there is a conflict of interest because seven board member defendants “are alleged to have acted outside the scope of their capacities” as members of the full board entity Cozen represents.
“The Board Member Defendants have separate interests that conflict with those of the Board as an entity, and vice–versa,” Quinlan’s motion says. “In making these determinations, the Board is entitled to counsel separate from and independent of counsel representing the Member Defendants.”
Additionally, neither the seven-member board named in the lawsuit nor the current board gave “informed consent” to the conflict of interest. Quinlan’s motion states that they are entitled to that consent.
The school board retained Cozen O’Connor at a meeting in mid-November, a move that hinted at the beginnings of the process of firing Martinez. Employment lawyers told the Tribune at the time that the board was likely looking for cause to fire the CEO. Martinez was fired without cause, meaning he will stay on the job until June.
Cozen received $40,000 for legal services, which was later increased to $75,000, according to Quinlan’s motion.
According to Chupack, defendants will need to respond to Quinlan’s motion to disqualify Cozen on or before April 14 and Martinez will respond on or before May 5. A hearing is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. May 15.
In early February, two leaders of the Chicago Teachers Union filed a motion to quash third-party discovery subpoenas served on them by Martinez. A separate hearing was scheduled for 10:15 a.m. March 18 to present the motion. Board members would likely not attend that hearing, according to Glenn.
