A few days ago, I posted this, from the Daily News:
Boss wanted a sextra for a bonus: suit
A junior lawyer was pressured to have sex with her boss after he threatened to not recommend her for a year-end bonus, a new lawsuit charges.
In court papers filed Wednesday, Alexandra Marchuk says she was subjected to a barrage of improper and unwanted sexual advances after she became a first-year litigator at the Manhattan law firm Faruqi & Faruqi in 2011.
She is suing the firm and her alleged tormenter—the firm’s senior partner, Juan Monteverde—for $2 million in Manhattan Federal Court.
Marchuk resigned days later and contacted an attorney.
“These claims are completely without merit brought by a disgruntled former employee,” said Lubna Faruqi, managing partner, Faruqi & Faruqi. “We look forward to aggressively defending our reputation in court and have every confidence we will be vindicated.”
Yesterday, the New York Times’s Peter Lattman published a much longer piece about this lawsuit.
These two articles about the same case offer a terrific opportunity to analyze and compare the different approaches a tabloid and a “news” newspaper take in their reportage. The Times article, Prominent Lawyer Is Accused of Sexual Harassment, is deeper and far more characterologically fascinating than the Daily News’ short piece. For one thing, here’s the Times on the lawyer (a plaintiff’s lawyer, yet) accused of sexual harassment:
Given Mr. Monteverde’s recent prominence in the securities class-action field, the lawsuit filed against him has ricocheted around the offices of corporate defense firms. Above the Law, a popular legal blog, devoted 3,400 words to the case and compared its details to “Tess of the d’Urbervilles…”
Read the whole Times piece. You’ll see what I mean.