U.S.: Court has Denied Defendants' Motion to Curtail the Authority of the Special Master-Monitor in Cobell v. Norton.

Article image "Apparently not content with impugning the authority of the Monitor, defense counsel inserts a footnote tacitly accusing the Court of unethical behavior:
“This development is even more troubling in light of the Court’s statement, in its January 17, 2003 Memorandum and Order, that it meets regularly with the Special Master-Monitor to, inter alia, instruct ‘the Monitor which task he should perform next . . . .’” Id. at 13 n.9. Given the recent conduct of defense counsel in this litigation, it is certainly ironic that defense counsel would presume to lecture the Court on the subject of legal ethics." Id. at 10 n 5.
"The fact that defense counsel would misrepresent a legitimate inquiry by the Monitor, in response to an invitation for followup questions, as the issuance of “discovery demands” on a deputy assistant attorney general only confirms the Court’s fear that the Justice Department attorneys in charge of the instant litigation have lost any sense of perspective about the manner in which this litigation should be conducted." Id. at 17 n 6.