New Wrinkles in Hispanic Abuse Case
A federal judge drops the hammer on an out-of-state lawyer representing embattled cops
by Willy Stern
A former Army captain with a military bearing, Arkansas attorney Christopher J. Lisle arrived in Nashville some 18 months ago, armed with a no-nonsense attitude, to represent his brother and two other Metro police officers who had become ensnared in the highly publicized Hispanic abuse case.
Lisle’s aggressive, win-at-all-costs style of lawyering has not won him many friends in Nashville’s legal community, but it has been effective in garnering public support for his clients in Nashville. As well, Lisle has shown a masterful ability to manipulate some in the media, to gain the trust of leaders in Nashville’s police union and to tarnish those he perceives as his enemies. To his credit and against the odds, all Lisle’s clients have been cleared of wrongdoing.
On the other hand, his legal tactics have so far proved futile in court. In short, Lisle has fared brilliantly in the court of public opinion in Nashville, but in the court system—where the law rules the day—he has, to date, come up short. Last week, in an unusual ruling, U.S. District Judge Joe Haynes ordered Lisle to pay about $44,000 in opposing attorney’s fees in connection with a federal lawsuit he had filed against police chief Emmett Turner and the city of Nashville, a suit that Haynes characterized as “frivolous” and “without merit.”
Lisle, who hails from Springdale, Ark., had sued the city in federal court here in October 2000, claiming that the police department had violated the officers’ civil rights by assigning them to desk duty pending the outcome of the Hispanic abuse investigation. Haynes disagreed, stating last week that Lisle “lacked any facts” to support his claims. Lisle’s clients include his older brother Rex Lisle, who resigned from the force in December 2000, and officers Mike Mann and Jason Beddoe.
A criminal investigation was launched in late 1999, shortly after the Scene reported on abuses of Hispanics by a local security firm.
The FBI and the police department have since exonerated Lisle, Mann and Beddoe—even though the department’s internal affairs unit had recommended that administrative action be taken against the officers. All three men moonlighted for Detection Services, a now defunct security firm.
Chris Lisle, who intends to appeal Haynes’ order, downplays its significance, saying the ruling was “not unexpected.” Lisle, 37, likens his legal strategy to a basketball game, and says that it’s “still early in the first quarter.” Nonetheless, the attorney faced another setback when the U.S. Justice Department decided last week not to pursue separate complaints his clients had filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The complaints alleged that the police department had discriminated against the officers. Lisle dismissed the EEOC’s decision as nothing more than an “administrative step.”
Lisle’s claims must have been “pretty outlandish” for the judge to have ordered the attorney—and not the plaintiffs—to pay the legal costs of the opposing side, says veteran Nashville attorney Bob DeLaney.
Still, Lisle deserves plaudits for advocating effectively on behalf of his clients. Among the officers’ biggest cheerleaders have been local conservative talk radio host Steve Gill and WSMV-Channel 4 reporter Dennis Ferrier.
Others, however, have raised questions about Lisle’s attack-on-all-fronts strategy and whether he can be objective while handling his brother’s case.
“I don’t know if Chris Lisle crossed the line or not,” says Nashville attorney Jerry Gonzalez. “Absolutely, representing his brother may cloud his legal judgment.”
Attorney Lisle dismisses the criticism. While acknowledging that he is carrying an “emotional burden,” he says the manner in which he has handled his lawsuit against Metro has “nothing to do with Rex being my brother.” Lisle is proud of bringing military tactics to his lawyering, explaining that, “we don’t take any of our cases lightly. When we file a suit, we do all that we can to win. And we don’t file frivolous lawsuits.”
Still, Lisle and his plaintiffs have employed a number of techniques to promote their cause, techniques that have annoyed some in Nashville. Take, for instance, Lisle’s dealings with David Raybin, a veteran Nashville attorney. Raybin represented a client who had been subpoenaed by Lisle in connection with the lawsuit against Metro. Lisle didn’t think Raybin was responding in a timely fashion, and threatened, in writing, to try to hold Raybin’s client in contempt of court, an unusual tactic. “That’s not how an experienced lawyer in Nashville would have acted,” Raybin explains.
Lisle’s clients appear to have engaged in smear campaigns against people whose credibility they hoped to undermine. One such person is Kennetha Sawyers, an African American attorney who runs the police department’s internal affairs unit. Sawyers’ office compiled a lengthy report on alleged misdeeds by the officers. Lisle’s clients filed a complaint—later found to be without merit—against Sawyers with the Board of Professional Responsibility, the outfit that disciplines lawyers in Tennessee. Even though such complaints are supposed to be confidential, the complaint was faxed from Rex Lisle’s home to the City Paper.
Early in the case, Lisle had affiliated with a local co-counsel in Nashville, Phil Davidson, to help navigate Nashville’s court system. Davidson, who declined comment, later withdrew from the case; at the time, it was widely believed that Davidson had begged off the case because he was uncomfortable with Lisle’s tactics. Lisle says Davidson never complained.
Comments (0)