HOUSTON (AP) -Brian McNamee’s lawyers told a federal judge on Wednesday that Roger Clemens’ lead lawyer should be removed from the case because he might be forced to attack the credibility of Andy Pettitte, a former client of the same attorney.
“Pettitte is central in every detail of this case. And they are going to have to go after him,” Richard Emery, one of McNamee’s lawyers, said during a two-hour hearing before U.S. District Judge Keith Ellison.
Clemens filed a defamation suit in January against McNamee, his former trainer, after McNamee accused him in the Mitchell Report of using performance-enhancing drugs in 1998, 2000 and 2001.
Rusty Hardin, the lawyer McNamee is attempting to remove from the case, originally represented Clemens and Pettitte before the release of the Mitchell Report. Pettitte then switched to other attorneys.
Hardin denied Emery’s claims he would use anything Pettitte told him in private in the lawsuit, which was filed in Texas state court and moved to federal court at McNamee’s request.
“Mr. Pettitte has never said anything to me he has not said publicly,” Hardin said.
Joe Roden, one of Clemens’ attorneys, said part of his fee agreement with Clemens calls for another lawyer to be brought in to question Pettitte if Clemens’ friend and former teammate testifies at a trial.
“We have never, ever violated our duty of loyalty or confidentiality,” Roden said. “Any suggestion is wrong.”
Ellison did not immediately rule on the motion. The date for the next court appearance in the case has not been set.
A seven-time Cy Young Award winner and 354-game winner, Clemens is under investigation by the FBI after denying McNamee’s claims while under oath during a deposition and public testimony before a congressional committee.
Pettitte, who admitted using human growth hormone, also was trained by McNamee. Pettitte told congressional lawyers that Clemens informed him nearly a decade ago he had used HGH and said McNamee let him know in 2003 or 2004 that Clemens had used steroids.
Clemens claims Pettitte “misremembers.”
“They accused (Pettitte) of saying he misremembered,” Emery said. “That is not something a lawyer says of a former client. That is not loyalty.”
Hardin told Ellison that after the Mitchell Report was released Dec. 13, implicating Clemens and Pettitte, Hardin told Pettitte he could no longer represent him and advised him to get a new attorney.
Hardin said Pettitte never signed a contract or paid legal fees.
Emery questioned Hardin’s judgment in representing both Clemens and Pettitte because of the “decision to represent two people who had diametrically different stories.”
Ellison said if Pettitte believed his rights were being violated, he or his representatives would have appeared at Wednesday’s court hearing and voiced their concerns.
“Instead, he’s sitting it out,” Ellison said.
Also pending before Ellison is a motion by McNamee’s attorneys to dismiss Clemens’ lawsuit on grounds that McNamee’s statements to baseball investigator George Mitchell were protected by “absolute immunity” through a deal McNamee struck with federal prosecutors.
Add A Comment