Collins documents conflict of interest concerns between Kramer Levin and Trump Organization
February 26, 2019
"I hope your firm is not intentionally trying to downplay its longstanding ties to The Trump Organization — and actively changing its website in real-time — simply because one of your firm’s partners, Mr. Berke, is now in a position to use the awesome powers of the United States Congress to investigate one of your firm’s leading clients."
WASHINGTON – Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, today sent a letter to Paul Pearlman, managing partner at Kramer Levin law firm, where Barry Berke remains a partner. The letter outlines concerns about Kramer Levin’s extensive work with the Trump Organization and Chairman Jerrold Nadler’s recent hiring of Berke as a consultant for Judiciary Committee Democrats. The letter also cites evidence indicating Kramer Levin may be attempting to deliberately hide and downplay the firm's affiliations with the Trump Organization as concerns about Berke’s conflict of interest intensify. In addition, the letter confirms Berke’s salary as a consultant to Democrats on the Committee is only slightly below the “senior staff” level, which protects Berke from mandatory financial disclosure forms and allows him to keep his financial entanglements hidden while he works for Kramer Levin. See full text of the letter here and below. February 26, 2019 Paul Pearlman Managing Partner Kramer Levin 117 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Dear Mr. Pearlman: I write to express concerns about apparent conflicts of interest between your firm’s representation of The Trump Organization and partner Barry H. Berke’s work for the Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee. A statement from your firm yesterday said Kramer Levin’s representation of The Trump Organization involved “minor tasks for single purpose companies.” Evidence suggests, however, Kramer Levin’s relationship with The Trump Organization goes much deeper. Until recently, your website highlighted The Trump Organization as a prominent firm client for “more than 25 years” on “innumerable real estate matters.” Those references, however, are now gone. For example, the current biography for partner Jay Neveloff on Kramer Levin’s website gives no indication the firm has represented The Trump Organization. A prior version of Mr. Neveloff’s biography, available elsewhere on Kramer Levin’s website, says the following: Donald Trump and The Trump Organization have also been clients for more than 25 years in innumerable real estate matters, including Trump Tower, 40 Wall Street, Trump Palace, Trump International in New York and Chicago, the GM Building, the Plaza Hotel and numerous other matters. Other Kramer Levin partners’ biographies indicate representations of The Trump Organization as well. Jordan Rosenbaum’s biography suggests he was a “[s]econd-lien noteholder committee of Trump Entertainment Resorts.” Jeffrey Braun’s biography notes he “[r]epresented The Trump Organization in litigation challenging the approvals for the residential building at 845 First Ave. and the Trump Soho Hotel.” On February 22, 2019, attorney Alan Futerfas sent a letter to Committee on Oversight and Reform Chairman Elijah Cummings. In that letter, Futerfas cites Mr. Neveloff’s history of representing The Trump Organization, while Mr. Rosenbaum and Mr. Braun are unnamed. It is unclear why Mr. Neveloff’s biography has recently changed on your firm’s website to reflect no affiliation with The Trump Organization, while Mr. Rosenbaum and Mr. Braun still have their representations public. In the past, your firm has, in fact, touted its work on behalf of The Trump Organization. For example, a cached press release issued on Kramer Levin’s website in 2015 highlights the firm’s representation of the Trump Plaza in a $185 million real estate deal. I hope your firm is not intentionally trying to downplay its longstanding ties to The Trump Organization — and actively changing its website in real-time — simply because one of your firm’s partners, Mr. Berke, is now in a position to use the awesome powers of the United States Congress to investigate one of your firm’s leading clients. As you know, the New York Rules of Professional Conduct state “a lawyer shall not represent a client if a reasonable lawyer would conclude . . . the representation will involve the lawyer in representing differing interests.” This rule applies to the entire firm. Rule 1.10(a) states “[w]hile lawyers are associated in a firm, none of them shall knowingly represent a client when any one of them practicing alone would be prohibited from doing so . . . ” Your firm’s statement yesterday definitively notes that Mr. Berke’s affiliation with your firm and with Democrats on the committee “does not pose any conflict of interest and respects any obligations the firm may have.” This statement is unsatisfactory given these new revelations about your firm’s dealings with Trump-related matters and the appearance that your firm is intentionally downplaying these dealings. In addition, the financial aspect of Mr. Berke’s relationship with both your firm and the committee needs further examining. Documents indicate Mr. Berke — despite retaining his partnership at Kramer Levin — will make a maximum of $125,000 from the committee for the calendar year 2019. This figure is conspicuously just below the $128,544 amount that would designate Mr. Berke as “senior staff” and trigger mandatory financial disclosures. Therefore, not only will the committee be providing a six-figure income to Mr. Berke, but the American people — whose taxes will be paying for Mr. Berke’s second salary — will be prevented from understanding the financial entanglements and possible financial conflicts of interest Mr. Berke brings to the table as a consultant to the Democrats. To assist the committee in ensuring Mr. Berke and Kramer Levin have fully untangled themselves from any possible conflicts of interest, please provide answers to the following questions by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, March 1, 2019:- Did your firm change Mr. Neveloff’s biography on the website after Mr. Futerfas’ February 22, 2019 letter?
- What was Mr. Berke’s salary from Kramer Levin in 2018?
- What was Mr. Berke’s bonus from Kramer Levin in 2018?
- What will Mr. Berke’s salary be at Kramer Levin in 2019, if he is working four days a week for the committee?
- Has your firm’s ethics counsel reviewed this matter to determine what, if any, effect this engagement has on Mr. Berke’s bar status in the state of New York?
- All references to Kramer Levin’s representation of The Trump Organization and related entities removed or deleted from Kramer Levin’s website since February 1, 2019;
- The conflict checks and screening procedures done by Kramer Levin in evaluating whether Mr. Berke is conflicted from working on matters involving Trump related entities;
- The conflict checks the firm undertook related to Mr. Berke’s work for the House Judiciary Committee; and
- The screening process the firm undertook related to Mr. Berke’s work for the House Judiciary Committee.