My, the squabbles between Apple and the e-book anti-trust monitor Michael Bromwich have been going on for a long time, haven’t they? I can’t even keep track of how many shots and volleys have been fired back and forth. The latest news out of the case involves the appeal of Judge Cote’s decision not to disqualify Bromwich. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals declined to reverse Cote’s decision, so Bromwich stays on.
Circuit Judge Dennis Jacobs found that some of Bromwich’s behavior (such as submitting an affidavit in conjunction with the plaintiffs’ legal brief) might be a little sketchy, but neither that nor Bromwich’s billing rate, “rich as it may be,” were sufficient grounds to disqualify him. U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman criticized Apple for waiting to bring up these issues while the relationship with the monitor steadily deteriorated.
This pretty neatly dashes the hopes of those who complain that Cote and Bromwich are corrupt, picking on poor old defenseless Apple. (Funny that the complaints Apple raised did not include the Wall Street Journal’s allegations of improper nepotistic behavior on Cote’s part by appointing him, isn’t it? It’s almost as if they knew those accusations wouldn’t fly.)
This case continues to provide a marvelous dose of schadenfreude almost every time something new comes to light. I look forward to seeing where it goes next.