Duke says lawyer in lacrosse case violating bar rule

Duke University is accusing the lawyer representing 38 members of the 2006 Duke lacrosse team of violating the same professional rule of conduct that fallen prosecutor Mike Nifong did.

J. Donald Cowan Jr. and Dan J, McLamb, lawyers for Duke and the Duke University Health System, filed a motion in federal court Thursday complaining about the Web site dukelawsuit.com, a news conference and other communications by Chuck Cooper, the Washington lawyer representing the players.

Thirty-eight members of the Duke 2006 lacrosse team filed suit last week, saying their reputations were damaged by their association to an escort service dancer's phony gang-rape allegations.

Cooper and Robert Bork Jr., the group's hired publicist and son of rejected Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork, announced the lawsuit at a news conference at the National Press Club in Washington.

The suit contends the players suffered emotional distress and other injuries when Duke University remained silent about evidence that early on contradicted the allegations of Crystal Gail Mangum, a dancer hired to perform at the team's now-infamous March 2006 party.

No player listed in the suit was charged in the case, but Cooper said they nonetheless had been through "a horrifying personal nightmare."

Duke, which posts its responses to the case on a university Web site, has asked a judge to declare the dukelawsuit.com Web site, the players' news conference and other statements in violation of a N.C. State Bar rule.

In its ethical rules, the State Bar orders lawyers to refrain from statements outside the courtroom that they know might have "a substantial likelihood of materially prejudicing" legal proceedings. But once one side talks to the media, ethics rules say, the other side can make statements "a reasonable lawyer" would believe are required to protect a client from bad publicity.

In their latest motion, the Duke lawyers complained that statements made by the players' attorney and his agents "appear calculated to 'influence the actual outcome of the trial' and prejudice a jury.

"In summary, the creation and aggressive promotion of a Web site purporting to be the 'the official source' of information about the lawsuit, the press conference at the National Press Club" and a news release issued Feb. 21 "make clear the plaintiffs' intention to 'use the techniques of modern communication ... to win litigation,' " the motion says.

Neither Cooper nor Bork could be reached for comment late Friday afternoon.