searching for a fair trial

The strange case of the attorney-client stipulation:

Second Circuit to Hear Hampton v. Wilkie, 23-305

On April 11th, 2024, the Second Circuit is set to hear oral argument in a case in which the appellant, Mr. Daniel Hampton alleges he never entered into a stipulation during a trial at the District Court in the Eastern District of New York.

Mr. Hampton, a father of two and a husband, claims that in the Eastern District of New York matter (Daniel Wilkies v. Denis McDonogh, Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, he never agreed or consented to the stipulation which his lawyers entered with the U.S. attorney’s office. He is asking the Second Circuit to remand the case for an evidential hearing in the lower Court, in the brief he filed with the Second Circuit.

Mr. Hampton’s former attorneys have since entered a settlement with him over the matter.

Mr. Daniel Hampton sued Denis McDonough the head of the Department of Veterans Affairs for sexual harassment, wrongful termination, hostile work environment, and retaliation. The case was the subject of a write-up in the New York Post due to the torrid nature of the allegations against Mr. Hampton’s supervisor.

While most cases are dismissed during summary judgment Hampton’s case made it to a courtroom in the Eastern District of New York. It was after surviving summary judgment that without Hampton’s knowledge, the defense attorney wrote a stipulation and submitted it to the court that prevented Hampton from speaking about the sexual harassment, having any witnesses, or discussing that he engaged in protected activity (EEO claim was open when they terminated him). Mr. Hampton only found out about a stipulation at his trial after a jury was picked and was led to believe that if he said anything the case would be dismissed. He only found out the details of the stipulation after the trial was concluded and he was going through the paperwork that was provided to him after a judge ordered it to be released to him over a month later. How could a jury member understand why Hampton was suing if he could not talk about why he filed his claim?

In addition to the stipulation, there were other documents that Hampton found in his file that he did not sign or agree to one being having the magistrate on the case be the presiding judge. Furthermore, during the trial with Hampton not being allowed to have witnesses the defense had witnesses that lied on the stand about the hiring process, and when evidence showing they lied was submitted to the court the response was it came from some website. I didn’t know that https://www.opm.gov/ which gives you the manual on the hiring process was just some website. 

Mr. Hampton is represented by attorney Kissinger N. Sibanda 

While the U.S. is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Megan Freismuth.

According to appellant’s brief, Megan Freismuth was the creator of the stipulation and was involved throughout the original matter in the Eastern District.

Domain name: HamptonSecondCircuit.com