In a recent development, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White of the Northern District of California has upheld a substantial sanction against Seattle lawyer Edward C. Chung. The judge has ordered Chung to pay $251,000 in attorney fees and nearly $17,000 in interest for submitting a fraudulent news article to the federal appeals court in San Francisco.
The Unraveling Saga
The controversy stems from Chung’s attempt to bolster his case for enforcing an $18 billion arbitration award against Chevron Corp. and other entities. In July 2021, Chung sought to introduce a purported news article titled “Saudi Sun” as a “supplemental exhibit” for “demonstrative purposes.” The article was submitted alongside a motion filed with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.
A Hypothetical Paper or a Fraudulent Act?
In August 2022, Chung defended the move, claiming that the article was merely a “hypothetical paper” intended to summarize the court record, with the court being duly informed of its purpose. However, in his letter to the 9th Circuit, he accused two judges of “an obvious abuse of judicial authority, corruption, and collusion” with Chevron Corporation and its counsel.
Remarkably, Chung did not appear for the sanctions hearing in August 2022. Subsequently, in June 2023, the 9th Circuit declared the article a “fraud upon the court” and referred the matter to Judge White to determine the appropriate sanction.
Rejected Requests and Accusations
Despite the seriousness of the allegations against him, Chung’s request for a hearing on the matter was rejected by Judge White. In a Jan. 8 judgment, the judge ordered Chung to pay the total attorney fees sought by Chevron Corp., coupled with interest.
Chung, however, continued to contest the legitimacy of the proceedings. In an October 2023 letter, he doubted the authenticity of Judge White’s signature on the sanctions order. He stated, “Please understand there have been so many profound oddities, threats, and misrepresentations made in this case by Chevron and their counsels. We have good reason to believe it is necessary to ensure the legitimacy of the court orders being executed.”
The Lawyer’s Response
Chung, affiliated with Chung Malhas & Mantel, responded to inquiries from the ABA Journal, stating that he was unavailable for immediate comments due to a deposition. He assured me that he would address the questions by the end of the day, later pushing the response timeline to Wednesday morning.
Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.