The conduct of the firm and its litigation team, Chen wrote in adopting a special master\u2019s recommendation, \u201cimplicates a culture of lawyering that is deeply disturbing.\u201d Not a rogue associate. Not an isolated lapse in judgment. A culture<\/em>. \u201cAt virtually every juncture in this misadventure,\u201d Chen wrote, \u201cthese attorneys turned a blind eye to the truth, deliberately failed to exercise diligence, violated their duties of candor to the Court, and then attempted to justify it \u2014 without basis.\u201d<\/p>\n The firm and its \u201centire litigation team\u201d allegedly engaged in a pattern of conduct that included propagating misleading statements from an expert witness. This wasn\u2019t a one-time mistake that spiraled. According to Chen, it was a sustained failure at every turn.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the damage:<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel must pay nearly $3 million in compensatory damages to plaintiff, plus a $100,000 punitive fine. Silicon Valley partners Andrew Bramhall and Brian Cannon are on the hook for additional sanctions of up to $58,000 each. San Francisco associate Elle Wang faces a $28,000 sanction. And two other Quinn Emanuel Silicon Valley lawyers, managing partner Victoria Maroulis and partner Margaret Shyr, may face additional sanctions, with Judge Chen deferring on their cases for now. <\/p>\n But the most striking part of the order isn\u2019t the dollar figures. It\u2019s that Bramhall, Cannon, and Wang must each complete an eight-hour legal ethics course. And the firm must develop that course itself.<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel \u2014 a firm that has never been accused of lacking confidence in its own abilities \u2014 has been ordered by a federal judge to sit down, think hard about what it did, and write its own ethics curriculum. It\u2019s the legal profession\u2019s version of being made to write \u201cI will not lie to the court\u201d on the blackboard. Except the blackboard costs $3 million.<\/p>\n So what exactly happened at Quinn? Judge Chen opens his sanctions order not with dry legal findings, but with a narrative \u2014 a detailed, almost novelistic account of a mid-level associate at \u201ca well-recognized law firm\u201d navigating a cascade of ethical failures over the course of a year. It reads like a Professional Responsibility exam hypothetical. At the end of four pages, he pulls back the curtain: \u201cThis is not a Professional Ethics issue spotter. These are the facts of Quinn Emanuel\u2019s conduct in the instant litigation.\u201d<\/p>\n You should absolutely read Judge Chen\u2019s full description<\/a> of the facts, but it involves an expert witness with access to embargoed study results, a late-breaking supplemental expert report (six weeks before trial), \u201cthin distinctions\u201d about how and when the new data was obtained that are \u201cnot apparent to the Court or opposing counsel,\u201d and troubling phrases like \u201cMaybe I don\u2019t want to know [how the expert got the study results early].\u201d<\/p>\n Chen\u2019s conclusion: the associate and her firm \u201cdeliberately and knowingly misled the Court.\u201d When asked about it afterward, \u201cthe associate doesn\u2019t believe that she did anything wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n Chen didn\u2019t pull any punches on what\u2019s really at stake here beyond this one case. The actions, he wrote, are \u201cparticularly damaging to younger associates, who take their cues and learn their practice from partners who fail to model ethical behavior, creating a vicious cycle.\u201d That\u2019s the line that should haunt the firm\u2019s leadership. This isn\u2019t just about the parties in the instant case. It\u2019s about what junior lawyers learn when they watch senior ones behave this way and face no consequences \u2014 until now.<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel issued a statement that was, in fairness, more contrite than the typical Biglaw non-apology apology. \u201cWe are deeply disappointed by the conduct described in the judge\u2019s Order. The lawyers involved have apologized to Judge Chen, and the Firm has joined in that apology.\u201d The firm says it is \u201cinstituting concrete measures,\u201d including having a firm executive committee member visit each office in person \u201cto emphasize the Firm\u2019s rejection of the conduct that Judge Chen described,\u201d and hiring an additional lawyer to the general counsel\u2019s staff \u201cwith the specific and sole charter to advise lawyers who face questions about disclosures to the Court.\u201d<\/p>\n The punitive sanction, Chen noted, is warranted in part because punitive damages can be awarded \u201cupon a clear and convincing finding. It is difficult to see why this standard would not apply here.\u201d Judges don\u2019t write sentences like that when they\u2019re mildly annoyed. They write them when they want the opinion to be read, cited, and remembered.<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel will soldier on \u2014 $3 million is a painful but survivable number for a shop of its size and profitability. But \u201cculture of lawyering that is deeply disturbing\u201d is going to follow this firm for a long time. <\/p>\n Kathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of\u00a0The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of\u00a0Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email\u00a0her<\/a>\u00a0with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n The post Quinn Emanuel Just Got a $3 Million Ethics Lesson. A Judge Made Them Write It Themselves.<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n Buckle up \u2014 this is the kind of sanctions order that make you wonder how any of this happened at a firm that charges what Quinn Emanuel charges.<\/p>\n On Tuesday<\/a>, Judge Edward M. Chen of the US District Court for the Northern District of California dropped a $3 million sanctions order<\/a> on Quinn Emanuel stemming from the firm\u2019s representation of Natera Inc. in a pharma advertising case, and the opinion is the kind of reading that should make every partner at that firm put down their coffee and stare at the wall for a while.<\/p>\n The conduct of the firm and its litigation team, Chen wrote in adopting a special master\u2019s recommendation, \u201cimplicates a culture of lawyering that is deeply disturbing.\u201d Not a rogue associate. Not an isolated lapse in judgment. A culture<\/em>. \u201cAt virtually every juncture in this misadventure,\u201d Chen wrote, \u201cthese attorneys turned a blind eye to the truth, deliberately failed to exercise diligence, violated their duties of candor to the Court, and then attempted to justify it \u2014 without basis.\u201d<\/p>\n The firm and its \u201centire litigation team\u201d allegedly engaged in a pattern of conduct that included propagating misleading statements from an expert witness. This wasn\u2019t a one-time mistake that spiraled. According to Chen, it was a sustained failure at every turn.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s the damage:<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel must pay nearly $3 million in compensatory damages to plaintiff, plus a $100,000 punitive fine. Silicon Valley partners Andrew Bramhall and Brian Cannon are on the hook for additional sanctions of up to $58,000 each. San Francisco associate Elle Wang faces a $28,000 sanction. And two other Quinn Emanuel Silicon Valley lawyers, managing partner Victoria Maroulis and partner Margaret Shyr, may face additional sanctions, with Judge Chen deferring on their cases for now. <\/p>\n But the most striking part of the order isn\u2019t the dollar figures. It\u2019s that Bramhall, Cannon, and Wang must each complete an eight-hour legal ethics course. And the firm must develop that course itself.<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel \u2014 a firm that has never been accused of lacking confidence in its own abilities \u2014 has been ordered by a federal judge to sit down, think hard about what it did, and write its own ethics curriculum. It\u2019s the legal profession\u2019s version of being made to write \u201cI will not lie to the court\u201d on the blackboard. Except the blackboard costs $3 million.<\/p>\n So what exactly happened at Quinn? Judge Chen opens his sanctions order not with dry legal findings, but with a narrative \u2014 a detailed, almost novelistic account of a mid-level associate at \u201ca well-recognized law firm\u201d navigating a cascade of ethical failures over the course of a year. It reads like a Professional Responsibility exam hypothetical. At the end of four pages, he pulls back the curtain: \u201cThis is not a Professional Ethics issue spotter. These are the facts of Quinn Emanuel\u2019s conduct in the instant litigation.\u201d<\/p>\n You should absolutely read Judge Chen\u2019s full description<\/a> of the facts, but it involves an expert witness with access to embargoed study results, a late-breaking supplemental expert report (six weeks before trial), \u201cthin distinctions\u201d about how and when the new data was obtained that are \u201cnot apparent to the Court or opposing counsel,\u201d and troubling phrases like \u201cMaybe I don\u2019t want to know [how the expert got the study results early].\u201d<\/p>\n Chen\u2019s conclusion: the associate and her firm \u201cdeliberately and knowingly misled the Court.\u201d When asked about it afterward, \u201cthe associate doesn\u2019t believe that she did anything wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n Chen didn\u2019t pull any punches on what\u2019s really at stake here beyond this one case. The actions, he wrote, are \u201cparticularly damaging to younger associates, who take their cues and learn their practice from partners who fail to model ethical behavior, creating a vicious cycle.\u201d That\u2019s the line that should haunt the firm\u2019s leadership. This isn\u2019t just about the parties in the instant case. It\u2019s about what junior lawyers learn when they watch senior ones behave this way and face no consequences \u2014 until now.<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel issued a statement that was, in fairness, more contrite than the typical Biglaw non-apology apology. \u201cWe are deeply disappointed by the conduct described in the judge\u2019s Order. The lawyers involved have apologized to Judge Chen, and the Firm has joined in that apology.\u201d The firm says it is \u201cinstituting concrete measures,\u201d including having a firm executive committee member visit each office in person \u201cto emphasize the Firm\u2019s rejection of the conduct that Judge Chen described,\u201d and hiring an additional lawyer to the general counsel\u2019s staff \u201cwith the specific and sole charter to advise lawyers who face questions about disclosures to the Court.\u201d<\/p>\n The punitive sanction, Chen noted, is warranted in part because punitive damages can be awarded \u201cupon a clear and convincing finding. It is difficult to see why this standard would not apply here.\u201d Judges don\u2019t write sentences like that when they\u2019re mildly annoyed. They write them when they want the opinion to be read, cited, and remembered.<\/p>\n Quinn Emanuel will soldier on \u2014 $3 million is a painful but survivable number for a shop of its size and profitability. But \u201cculture of lawyering that is deeply disturbing\u201d is going to follow this firm for a long time. <\/p>\n Buckle up \u2014 this is the kind of sanctions order that make you wonder how any of this happened at a firm that charges what Quinn Emanuel charges. On Tuesday, Judge Edward M. Chen of the US District Court for the Northern District of California dropped a $3 million sanctions order on Quinn Emanuel stemming […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":152482,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-152481","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/IMG_5243-1-scaled-e1623338814705-620x568-POCOPg.jpg?fit=620%2C568&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/152481","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=152481"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/152481\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/152482"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=152481"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=152481"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=152481"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2026\/05\/yikes-cringe.gif?resize=498%2C498&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2021\/06\/IMG_5243-1-scaled-e1623338814705-620x568.jpg?resize=174%2C160&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/abovethelaw.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/4\/2018\/08\/Benchslapped-01-300x241.jpg?resize=300%2C241&ssl=1\" "\\"\\"")
<\/figure>\n
\nKathryn Rubino is a Senior Editor at Above the Law, host of\u00a0The Jabot podcast<\/a>, and co-host of\u00a0Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. AtL tipsters are the best, so please connect with her. Feel free to email\u00a0her<\/a>\u00a0with any tips, questions, or comments and follow her on Twitter\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky\u00a0@Kathryn1<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"