disinfozone/The_Info_Web
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

vault backup: 2026-09-22 16:48:54

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
disinfo.zone 2026-09-22 16:48:54 -04:00
parent 19f225112b
commit 38d5eec140
No known key found for this signature in database
76 changed files with 950 additions and 194 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

6
20 - ORGANIZATIONS/PRIVATE/INSLAW.md
View file

@ -42,15 +42,15 @@ INSLAW's lead litigation counsel, Leigh Ratiner of the Washington firm Dickstein
### Bankruptcy and Litigation History
Bankruptcy Judge [[George Francis Bason, Jr.]] presided over two landmark proceedings in the INSLAW case. In June 1987, he found that DOJ had "unlawfully, intentionally and willfully" attempted to convert INSLAW's Chapter 11 reorganization into a Chapter 7 liquidation "without justification and by improper means," based in part on testimony from DOJ official Anthony Pasciuto, who stated that DOJ director Thomas Stanton had pressured U.S. Trustee Edward White to force the company into liquidation. In September 1987, after a two-week liability trial, Bason ruled that DOJ had "taken, converted, stole, INSLAW's enhanced PROMIS by trickery, fraud, and deceit," awarding approximately $6.8 million in damages and attorneys' fees.[^1]
Bankruptcy Judge [[George Francis Bason, Jr.]] presided over two landmark proceedings in the INSLAW case. In June 1987, he found that DOJ had "unlawfully, intentionally and willfully" attempted to convert INSLAW's Chapter 11 reorganization into a Chapter 7 liquidation "without justification and by improper means," based in part on testimony from DOJ official Anthony Pasciuto, who stated that DOJ director Thomas Stanton had pressured U.S. Trustee Edward White to force the company into liquidation. In September 1987, after a two-week liability trial, Bason ruled that DOJ had "taken, converted, stole, INSLAW's enhanced PROMIS by trickery, fraud, and deceit," with damages later computed at about 6.8 million dollars and attorneys' fees.[^1]
The D.C. Circuit Court affirmed Bason's ruling in November 1989, with Judge William Bryant finding "convincing, perhaps compelling support" for the bankruptcy court's conclusions. The Court of Appeals reversed all lower court rulings in May 1991 on jurisdictional grounds, finding the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction because DOJ held PROMIS under a claim of right at the time of the bankruptcy filing. The Supreme Court declined review.[^2]
Senior District Judge [[William Bryant, Jr.|William Bryant]] of the district court affirmed Bason's ruling on November 22, 1989, finding "convincing, perhaps compelling support" for the bankruptcy court's conclusions and reducing the damages by 655,200 dollars. The D.C. Circuit reversed on May 7, 1991, on jurisdictional grounds, finding the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction because DOJ held PROMIS under a claim of right at the time of the bankruptcy filing. The Supreme Court declined review.[^2]
The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI) issued a report in September 1989 finding "no proof" that [[Lowell Jensen]] and [[Edwin Meese]] had conspired to ruin INSLAW or steal its software. The Senate report nonetheless found that DOJ official Thomas Stanton had improperly sought special handling for INSLAW's bankruptcy and criticized the Department for placing Brewer in charge of the implementation contract given his prior employment by INSLAW.[^3]
The House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Representative [[Jack Brooks]], conducted a three-year investigation from 1989 to 1992. Its September 1992 report (House Report 102-857) found "strong evidence...that the Department of Justice 'acted willfully and fraudulently,' and 'took, converted and stole,' Inslaw's Enhanced PROMIS by 'trickery fraud and deceit.'" A key basis for this conclusion was testimony from Deputy Attorney General [[Arnold Burns]], who had told DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility in 1986 that INSLAW's proprietary rights claim was "legitimate" and that the government "would probably lose the case in court on this issue," yet DOJ continued litigating against INSLAW for another decade.[^1]
Special Counsel [[Nicholas J. Bua]] issued a 267-page report in March 1993 finding no credible evidence that any DOJ official had committed criminal wrongdoing in connection with the INSLAW matter. The Senate subsequently referred INSLAW's remaining claims to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in May 1995. Judge Christine Miller ruled on July 31, 1997, that all versions of PROMIS were in the public domain and that the government had always been entitled to use the software as it wished. A three-judge Review Panel upheld that ruling in August 1998. INSLAW received no compensation from the federal government.[^2][^6]
Special Counsel [[Nicholas J. Bua]] issued a 267-page report in March 1993 finding no credible evidence that any DOJ official had committed criminal wrongdoing in connection with the INSLAW matter. The Senate subsequently referred INSLAW's remaining claims to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims in May 1995. Judge [[Christine Odell Cook Miller|Christine Miller]] ruled on July 31, 1997, that all versions of PROMIS were in the public domain and that the government had always been entitled to use the software as it wished. A three-judge Review Panel upheld that ruling in August 1998. INSLAW received no compensation from the federal government.[^2][^6]
### FBI Systems Analysis