A Spinoff from Her Sitcom: Jessica Cutler's Legal Drama
Yes, we know you're getting tired of her; so are we (and just wait until her TV show airs). But since this blog owes some of its prominence to reporting her misadventures, we owe you an update about Jessica Cutler.
According to the Associated Press:
A judge on Wednesday allowed a lawsuit to proceed against Jessica Cutler, the former Senate aide who posted details of her sex life on the Internet. The case brought by Sen. Mike DeWine's former counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, Robert Steinbuch, alleges that Cutler engaged in an invasion of his privacy in 2004 by publishing sexually explicit facts about a relationship with Steinbuch.
But even though the judge declined to dismiss the suit, his ruling on the statute-of-limitations issue may not bode well for Steinbuch:
U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman ruled that Steinbuch had one year from the time of the Internet postings to bring the matter to court. Almost all of the material at issue in the case was posted on the Internet more than a year before the lawsuit was filed May 18, 2005.
Steinbuch, by the way, is now a law professor at the University of Arkansas (where Bill Clinton used to teach). Kinda gross to imagine your professor entering through the back door, isn't it?
Yawn, this is boring; we don't care about this technical legal crap. Where's all the juicy stuff?
After the jump, of course.
Update: This post is the subject of a correction.
On Monday of this week, a reader sent us this email (with attached documents):
Check out the attached motion to disqualify Jessica's newly retained counsel, William Bode. Steinbuch's lawyers filed it last Friday, claiming that Bode is, in fact, "W" from Jessica's short-lived (yet still living in cache-land) Washingtonienne blog. Yes, the same "W" who was into paying Cutler for a bit of butt fucking every now and then. The motion is wonderfully gossipy and trashy, and not just in a lawyer way.
We agree with this characterization of the motion. One of us practiced law for a bit, and we sure never saw stuff like this in any motion papers:
"W" is the subject of the Blog and discussed in the Blog, inter alia, as follows: 'W = A suger daddy who wants nothing but anal. Keep on trying to end it with him, but the money is too good.... I am done with W, for real this time. A man who tries to fuck you in the ass when you are sober does not love you. He should at least take you out for a few drinks to spare you the pain.
C'mon, Jess, don't be so naive -- the guy's a lawyer. Screwing people up the butt is in his job description.
So yeah, according to the motion to disqualify, Jessica allegedly slept with "W" -- a "middle-aged, lead attorney in a small Washington, DC law firm," who lives in Georgetown (just like William Bode). Then she blogged about it. Then she retained "W" to represent her when another former lover/blog subject sued her. This all shows exquisite judgment.
Our tipster's sober commentary:
I'm pretty sure this is a conflict of interest everywhere, even in this jaded town. Oh, and Bode filed an oh-so-meek notice of withdrawal. Also attached.
Bode's one-page notice doesn't admit that he was a paramour of Cutler; but actions speak louder than words. Why else would a lawyer turn away paying work?
And on that subject: How was Cutler compensating Bode for his legal services? Was he doing this pro bono [sic]?
Judge Allows Sex Blogs Lawsuit to Proceed [AP]
Reliable Source: For Washingtonienne, A Rendezvous at the Bar? [WP]
Robert Steinbuch Faculty Bio [University of Arkansas at Little Rock]
Steinbuch v. Cutler: When is a Personal Blog Considered Publicity? [Privacy and Security Law Blog]
Earlier:Oh, Look, It's the Ides of March: Jessica Cutler's TV Show