inslaw
real history archives: inslaw: some more information, including a summary of inslaw’s claims .
33. inslaw insists that a memorandum [ inslaw exhibit no. 68 ] dated may 5, 1986 which was prepared by marion holton, inslaw' s
according to bankruptcy court records, a company controlled by brian offered to buy inslaw when inslaw came under financial pressure because the justice department began to withhold software payments. hamilton refused to sell and inslaw was plunged into bankruptcy .
inslaw' s new allegations described the justice department dispute with inslaw as part of a broad conspiracy to drive inslaw into bankruptcy so that earl brian, the founder of a venture capital firm called biotech (later infotechnology), could acquire inslaw' s assets, including its software promis. inslaw owner william hamilton told psi investigators that brian had first attempted to acquire inslaw through a computer services corporation he controlled, called hadron. hamilton said that he rejected an offer from hadron to acquire inslaw, and that brian then attempted to drive inslaw into bankruptcy through his influence with attorney general edwin meese. [ 49 ]
in 1978, princeton university awarded the rockefeller public service award to inslaw' s founder and to inslaw' s first customer for their work with promis .
meanwhile, the government attempted to force inslaw into liquidation, by seeking to convert its chapter 11 reorganization into a chapter 7 liquidation that would have put inslaw permanently out of business. that effort ultimately failed and inslaw continues to operate .
mark gorton attributes responsibility for the inslaw affair to the cabal. [ 1 ]
entity tags: william hamilton, us department of justice, inslaw, inc .
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , us department of justice, peter videnieks
entity tags: elliot richardson, us department of justice, inslaw, inc .
in re inslaw, inc. , 76 b. r. 224 – urltoken
ii. sovereign immunity does not insulate the defendants against inslaw' s claims .
in re inslaw, inc. , 97 b. r. 685 – urltoken
united states of america, et al. , appellants, v. inslaw, inc. inslaw, inc. v. united states of americ ...
to remind the cia director of something to which the inslaw matter is connected .
the justice department withheld payment for the software, and inslaw went into bankruptcy. inslaw hired former attorney general elliot richardson as their attorney. richardson filed a civil suit claiming that inslaw had been the victim of a conspiracy by the justice department .
on the next page, the fbi document describes how leigh ratiner, inslaw’s attorney, had been fired from his law firm for his “failure to control” inslaw. ratiner believed that this was in retaliation for naming lowell jensen in the inslaw suit .
once the doj had control of promis, it dogmatically refused to verify that inslaw had created the enhancements, essentially rendering the contract modification useless. when inslaw protested, the doj began to withhold payments. two years later, inslaw was forced into bankruptcy .
the inslaw (promis) case was a complex and as yet unclear deep event .
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , house judiciary committee, us department of justice
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , us supreme court, us department of justice
promis inslaw clinton systematics fusiongps all related... is this the missing link ?
in re inslaw, inc. , debtor. inslaw, inc. , plaintiff, v. united states of america and the united states department of justice, defendants .
formerly been employed as general counsel of inslaw' s predecessor between 1974 and 1976 .
inslaw' s analysis and rebuttal of the bua report, july 11, 1993 .
riconosciuto is currently in chicago testifying to the special grand jury on the inslaw case .
relief of inslaw, inc. , and william a. hamilton and nancy burke hamilton
in litigation discovery several years later, inslaw learned that the executive office for u. s. attorneys had been so upset with hamilton’s april 1982 memorandum that it considered terminating inslaw’s three - year contract one month after awarding it to inslaw in march 1982 .
the bua report summarizes inslaw' s main allegations on pp. 3 - 10 .
as an initial proposition, i disagree with defendants' characterizations of inslaw' s claims. inslaw' s claims are grounded squarely in bankruptcy law; inslaw seeks relief for violations of the automatic stay imposed by section 362 (a) of the bankruptcy code .
in re inslaw, inc. , debtor. inslaw, inc. , plaintiff, v. the united states of america and the united states department of justice, defendants .
later, during the summer of 2001, admiral daniel murphy, a former senior national security and intelligence official, read the same 50 - page inslaw summary at inslaw’s request .
cia / usdoj stolen inslaw promis spy software urltoken enduring innovation for over 36 years, inslaw has been a pioneer in the development of software products for the... more
for some, thornburgh' s response to inslaw is the central mystery of the case .
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , daniel murphy, national security agency, william hamilton
entity tags: bureau of justice statistics, us department of justice, inslaw, inc .
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , lowell jensen, edwin meese, house judiciary committee
inslaw, inc. v. united states of america and united states department of justice .
angel of death gives deposition to justice department in inslaw case, by j. orlin grabbe
( how did inslaw know that the u. s. government had sold the product without authorization? because — get this — canada called inslaw one day looking for user manuals. problem was, inslaw had never sold it to canada. i’m sure an awkward pause ensued… )
the doj agreed to these conditions, but requested inslaw prove it had indeed created enhanced promis with private funds. inslaw said it would, and the enhanced software was given to the doj .
for over 42 years, new generations of inslaw software have kept pace with changing customer needs .
entity tags: us department of justice, inslaw, inc. , elliot richardson, richard thornburgh
entity tags: idateasiapi, house judiciary committee, inslaw, inc. , us department of justice
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , c. madison “brick” brewer, us department of justice
entity tags: c. madison “brick” brewer, us department of justice, inslaw, inc .
entity tags: harvey sherzer, inslaw, inc. , peter videnieks, us department of justice
disputed software in escrow, so that if inslaw went bankrupt, then the government would receive the enhanced software and its interest would still be protected. doj rejected inslaw' s escrow proposal .
relief must be available to inslaw under the bankruptcy code' s broad provisions waiving sovereign immunity .
lawyers for inslaw have alleged that cornelius blackshear, a former u. s. trustee, lied in sworn depositions when questioned about an attempt to force inslaw' s liquidation, sources said .
[ emphasis supplied. ] order of december 2, 1986, inslaw exhibit no. 11 .
` 'preposterous '`; and jensen has questioned the quality of inslaw 's product .
by february 1985, the government had withheld payment of almost $ 1. 8 million for inslaw' s implementation services, plus millions of dollars in old promis license fees. inslaw filed for
the doj began withholding payments to inslaw in 1983, a month after inslaw’s owners had refused to sell the company to a friend of the attorney general, and a year after inslaw had demonstrated the software to the fbi for use as their new case management software .
[ 2 ]
this summer, inslaw signed an deal with ibm under which the computer giant agreed to loan the company $ 1. 5 million to help fund inslaw' s emergence from chapter 11 and an additional $ 1 million to make enhancements to ibm' s version of inslaw software, hamilton said .
inslaw' s owners, william and nancy hamilton, and his chief lawyer, former attorney general eliot richardson, charge that the effort to destroy inslaw was engineered by senior reagan administration officials, and their friends and associates, to reap millions of dollars from sale of inslaw' s software .
inslaw chairman william a. hamilton and inslaw' s trial attorneys at mcdermott, will & emery and its bankruptcy attorneys at docter, docter & salus also declined comment on bason' s removal .
inslaw did not learn the identity of the federal customer for another decade. in 2006, a retired senior counsel from the software ag reston subsidiary confirmed to inslaw that the customer was the fbi .
united states of america and the united states department of justice, appellants, v. inslaw, inc. , appellee. in re inslaw, inc. , debtor. inslaw, inc. , plaintiff, v. united states of america, and the united states department of justice, defendants .
in march 1982, inslaw was awarded a contract by doj to implement and install enhanced promis in various united states attorneys offices. inslaw alleges that, commencing almost immediately and continuing throughout its contract performance, inslaw was subjected to harassment by doj; that disputes arose, none of which were resolved; and that doj ultimately terminated a portion of its contract with inslaw for the convenience of the government .
in august 1984, at & t signed a contract with inslaw to loan the company technical help to create software products for at & t computers. but shortly after inslaw filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in february 1985, at & t stopped deliveries of equipment inslaw needed to perform its contract, according to court documents filed by inslaw. at & t then said that inslaw was
never realistically able to meet { the } milestones
set out in the contract, according to the filings .
entity tags: charles work, inslaw, inc. , public integrity section, us department of justice
promis inslaw clinton systematics fusiongps all related... is this the missing link? , page 1
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , james rogers, joyce demy, latham, watkins & hills
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , house judiciary committee, arnold burns, us department of justice
management system, the contract between inslaw and justice quickly became embroiled in bitterness and controversy which has lasted for almost a decade. the conflict centers on the question of whether inslaw has ownership of its privately
56 b. r. at 1020. inslaw is entitled to an opportunity to prove its claims .
it quickly became apparent that the successful prosecution of inslaw' s claim against doj would be anything but a straightforward task; the problem facing inslaw and ds & m was remarkably complex and multidimensional .
to force inslaw out of business so that it would be unable to seek restitution through the courts .
version originally specified in the contract. however, the government failed to negotiate the payment of license fees as promised, claiming that inslaw had failed to prove to the government' s satisfaction that inslaw had developed the enhanced version with private, non - government funds and that the enhanced version was not otherwise required to be delivered to the government under any of its contracts with inslaw—that is, inslaw had provided it
the doj began withholding payments to inslaw in 1983, a month after inslaw’s owners had refused to sell the company to a friend of the attorney general, and a year after inslaw had demonstrated the software to the fbi for use as their new case management software. as a result, inslaw was forced into bankruptcy, and eventually sued the u. s. government. the court ruled in inslaw’s favor, finding that the doj’s officials “took, converted and stole” the software through “trickery, fraud and deceit. ”
the bankruptcy court had ruled that by spreading unauthorized copies of inslaw' s software and allegedly interfering with the company' s affairs, the department had hindered inslaw' s ability to reorganize under bankruptcy protection .
within several weeks of inslaw’s delivery of it, however, the executive office reneged on its commitment, and simultaneously began to withhold payments due inslaw under the contract, using newly - concocted sham contract disputes .
information i, rick conway and george brown gathered during the first month of ds & m' s representation gradually developed to the point where it began to appear that doj' s withholding of funds due inslaw and contesting of inslaw' s ownership rights in its key product, namely 'enhanced promis,' was a principal cause of inslaw' s bankruptcy. further, you informed us that doj had had contacts with current or potential inslaw customers and either disparaged inslaw or intimated that doj would make enhanced promis available for free. motivation for doj' s actions was unclear, but you stated that the presence of a fired inslaw employee as promis implementation contract manager for doj suggested an active and malicious bias against inslaw .
entity tags: bankruptcy court for the district of columbia, us department of justice, inslaw, inc .
entity tags: us department of justice, arnold burns, office of professional responsibility, inslaw, inc .
entity tags: h. lawrence wallace, inslaw, inc. , us department of justice, william hamilton
entity tags: janice a. sposato, harvey sherzer, us department of justice, inslaw, inc .
inslaw would deliver to the government all promis programs and supporting documentation developed for or relating to the contract .
between august 29, 1983 and february 18, 1985, inslaw installed promis in all 20 u. s. attorneys' offices as provided for under the contract. inslaw implemented the enhanced version of the software .
modification to the contract. while justice officials at the time recognized inslaw' s proprietary rights to any privately
in re inslaw, inc. , 76 b. r. 224 (d. c. 1987 )
in re inslaw, inc. , 97 b. r. 685 (d. c. 1989 )
under a general retainer
of d. s. & m. by inslaw, as follows :
39. despite the disastrous effect inslaw' s application had on the relationship between attorney and client, d. s. & m. made the effort to have direct discussions with inslaw to clear the air .
bason ruled that brewer grew' so consumed by hatred' against inslaw and its president, william hamilton, that he systematically sabotaged inslaw' s $ 10 million justice department contract and also ruined its other business .
murphy died suddenly about a week later. the george w. bush administration, especially deputy attorney general larry thompson, stonewalled inslaw counsel boyden gray, just as three earlier administrations had stonewalled inslaw counsel elliot richardson .
6. also reserved for later determination, at the trial scheduled to begin on january 27, 1988, is inslaw' s request for an injunction requiring doj to be bound by the terms and conditions of inslaw' s standard license agreement with respect to each of those offices in which doj already has implemented the privately - funded enhanced version of promis, and requiring doj to compensate inslaw by paying to inslaw its standard license fee .
57. on september 29, 1988, inslaw filed the instant objection [ p. 925 ] to the proof of claim filed by d. s. & m. for compensation as inslaw' s special counsel .
united states of america, et al. , appellants, v. inslaw, inc. inslaw, inc. v. united states of america, et al. , appellants. inslaw, inc. v. united states of america, et al. , appellants. inslaw, inc. v. united states of america, et al. , appellants, 932 f. 2d 1467 (d. c. cir. 1991 )
the latest ruling involves an epic legal battle between inslaw inc. , a washington computer software firm, and the government. two federal judges ruled previously that the justice department had stolen inslaw' s valuable computer software .
as if things weren' t getting hot enough for the federal bankruptcy court system, but now the inslaw case is becoming another watergate. inslaw was a washington, d. c. , based computer firm that sold a highly technical tracking software program to the u. s. department of justice. federal judges have upheld inslaw' s contention that the justice department, under attorney general edwin meese, stole inslaw' s computer program .
according to congressional and court documents, brewer and videnieks didn' t tarry in their efforts to destroy inslaw. after inslaw' s installation of public domain promis had begun, the doj claimed that inslaw, which was supporting the installation with its own computers running the enhanced version of promis, was on the brink of bankruptcy. although inslaw was contracted to provide only the public domain promis, the doj demanded that inslaw turn over the enhanced version of promis in case the company could not complete its contractual obligations. inslaw agreed to this contract modification, but on two conditions: that the doj recognize inslaw' s proprietary rights to enhanced promis, and that the doj not distribute enhanced promis beyond the boundaries of the contract (the 94 us attorney' s offices. )
inslaw pioneered the use of advanced software engineering tools to customize application software to the specific requirements of each customer .
entity tags: us district court for the district of columbia, inslaw, inc. , us department of justice
entity tags: george bason, daniel casolaro, inslaw, inc. , randall davis, us department of justice
entity tags: elliot richardson, donald santarelli, inslaw, inc. , lowell jensen, us department of justice
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , latham, watkins & hills, roderick m. hills, william hamilton
the inslaw affair: this is a good collection of links to resources such as the house committee investigation report .
allegations against meese, others in collapse of software firm: u. s. probing possible perjury in inslaw case
when he announced his decision, bason rejected stanton' s sworn denial of inslaw' s allegation that he had asked blackshear to send his chief deputy to washington to convert inslaw' s bankruptcy reorganization into a liquidation proceeding .
inslaw said that u. s. bankruptcy judge james schneider will convene a status conference on the case thursday .
the justice department agent responsible for making payments was a former, fired inslaw employee, c. madison brewer .
to advise him on the allegations that high - ranking officials had acted improperly for personal gain to bankrupt inslaw .
the u. s. government has never paid inslaw inc. for any of these unauthorized uses of promis .
` 'trickery, fraud and deceit '` to try to steal a software program that inslaw had developed .
in the meantime, inslaw also developed privately owned enhancements to promis. despite contractual guarantees of inslaw’s proprietary rights to the enhanced version of promis, the justice department essentially commandeered the improved program for its own uses without paying for it. inslaw was forced into bankruptcy and began an endless fight with the justice department to recoup its losses .
the inslaw software is used by federal prosecutors to track details of criminal cases. inslaw' s president said use of the software was limited to only 42 offices of u. s. attorneys and one justice department division .
to force inslaw into liquidation for the express purpose of incapacitating the company from litigating the government’s theft of promis .
pursuant to the congressional reference resolution, inslaw sued the government in the court of federal claims in august 1995 .
united states of america, et al. , appellants, v. inslaw, inc. inslaw, inc. v. united states of america, et al. , appellants. inslaw, inc. v. united states of america, et al. , appellants. inslaw, inc. v. united states of america, et al. , appellants, 932 f. 2d 1467 (d. c. cir. 1991): : justia
the report concluded that the subcommittee found no proof for a broad conspiracy against inslaw within the doj, or a conspiracy between doj officials and outside parties to force inslaw into bankruptcy for personal benefit. however, it criticized doj for hiring a former inslaw employee (brewer) to oversee inslaw' s contract with eousa, and for failing to follow standard procedures in handling inslaw' s complaints. it also criticized the doj for a lack of cooperation with the subcommittee, which delayed the investigation and undercut the subcommittee' s ability to interview department employees. [ 56 ]
inslaw' s initial filing claimed that the contract disputes arose because the doj officials who administered the contract were biased against inslaw. [ 30 ] the filing specifically mentioned promis project manager, c. madison brewer, and associate attorney general, d. lowell jensen. brewer had previously been inslaw' s general counsel, but according to inslaw had been terminated for cause. inslaw claimed that brewer' s dismissal caused him to be unreasonably biased against inslaw and owner william hamilton. [ 31 ] jensen was a member of the project oversight committee at the time of the contract. he had helped to develop another competing case management software system several years earlier, and inslaw claimed that this led him to be prejudiced against promis, so that he ignored the unreasonable bias of brewer. [ 32 ]
in the final days of the carter administration, the leaa was phased out. inslaw had made a name for itself and hamilton wanted to stay in business, so he converted inslaw to a for - profit, private business. the new inslaw did not own the public domain version of promis because it had been developed with leaa funds. but because it had funded a major upgrade with its own money, inslaw did claim ownership of the enhanced promis .
the department withheld payment from inslaw after a series of contractual disputes with the company. inslaw eventually went bankrupt; it charged in court that senior officials in the department stole the program and gave it their friends to sell abroad .
the democratic majority called upon attorney general dick thornburgh to compensate inslaw immediately for the harm that the government had
egregiously
inflicted on inslaw. the republican minority dissented and the committee divided along party lines 21–13. [ 61 ]
it all began when associates of then attorney general edwin meese and dr. earl brian, a business associate of meese and also a cabinet officer under governor ronald reagan, attempted to buy a small computer software company called inslaw. inslaw had developed a highly sensitive program for tracking criminals - the software was called promis. inslaw had signed a $ 10 million contract with the u. s. justice department to develop the software under contract to them. inslaw was not paid for the program and it was told that if it didn' t sell the company it would have problems - it did. when insiders at the justice department blocked payments to inslaw, those insiders included one fired employee of inslaw and one former competitor of the firm - inslaw was pushed into the bankruptcy courts. the justice department, according to evidence on file, pushed the bankruptcy court to declare inslaw insolvent. instead the bankruptcy court ruled that the justice department owed inslaw $ 6. 8 million. the judge who made the ruling was removed from the bench .
welcome to inslaw, inc. - software you can grow with - case management software - modulaw, cjis, promise
entity tags: us department of justice, inslaw, inc. , us court of appeals for the district of columbia
entity tags: us department of justice, elliot richardson, inslaw, inc. , public integrity section, richard thornburgh
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , frank mallgrave, executive office for us attorneys (doj), laurence mcwhorter
entity tags: us department of justice, house judiciary committee, inslaw, inc. , systems architects, inc .
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , dean merrill, john gizarelli, c. madison “brick” brewer, william hamilton
in re inslaw, inc. , 88 b. r. 484 (d. d. c. 1988 )
in the meantime, inslaw also developed privately - owned enhancements to promis. despite contractual guarantees of inslaw 's proprietary rights to the enhanced version of promis, the justice department essentially commandeered the improved program for its own uses without paying for it. inslaw was forced into bankruptcy and began an endless fight with the justice department to recoup its losses .
37. the request for a meeting was made by inslaw without advance notice to d. s. & m .
the government then unsuccessfully attempted to force inslaw into liquidation, rather than allow a financial reorganization, the judge said .
in re inslaw, inc. , 76 b. r. 224 (d. d. c. 1987 )
finally, the committee stated that the department of justice had obstructed its investigation of the inslaw affair and its access to witnesses and documents, and noted justice had similarly obstructed an earlier inslaw affair investigation by the senate permanent investigations subcommittee .
staff study of allegations pertaining to the department of justice' s handling of a contract with inslaw, inc. /
and, separately, by inslaw’s litigation counsel, to identify its federal government customer, the reston software ag subsidiary declined to answer. the erroneous pre - trial ruling precluded inslaw from using the authority of the court to compel an answer .
following the liquidation of leaa, however, offices wishing to acquire promis would need to pay license fees to the new for - profit inslaw, inc. the people financing the new for - profit inslaw, including the hamiltons, sought confirmation in advance that justice understood and agreed with the need for the new for - profit inslaw to charge promis license fees .
who: bill hamilton and his wife, nancy hamilton, start inslaw to nurture promis (prosecutors management information systems) .
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , frank hunger, christine miller, court of federal claims, us department of justice
entity tags: william hamilton, inslaw, inc. , house judiciary committee, john gizarelli, c. madison “brick” brewer
entity tags: us department of justice, william hamilton, arnold burns, inslaw, inc. , stanley e. morris
entity tags: inslaw, inc. , earl brian, reagan administration, sct, william hamilton, allen & co .
entity tags: edwin meese, inslaw, inc. , lowell jensen, us department of justice, office of professional responsibility
( 1) a declaratory judgment in favor of inslaw that it is the sole owner of the proprietary enhancements to promis .
[ 19 ] department of transportation contract appeals board, the administrative agency with jurisdiction over contract disputes between inslaw and doj .
allegations against meese, others in collapse of software firm: u. s. probing possible perjury in inslaw case - latimes
1. the instant chapter 11 bankruptcy case of inslaw, inc. [
inslaw
] was commenced by its filing of a voluntary petition in the u. s. bankruptcy court for the district of columbia on february 7, 1985 .
in april inslaw received overtures from another company about a possible purchase of inslaw. corporate counsel neil lefkowitz and rebecca wright, in conjunction with garr, conway and me analyzed the parameters of the offer and its effect on the prospective litigation .
42. the meeting with judge bason was cancelled and d. s. & m. continued its representation of inslaw .
inslaw developed a computer software program used by justice department lawyers and federal prosecutors. at the center of the case was c. madison brewer - - fired by inslaw but who later supervised his former employer' s contract with the justice department .
hamilton said inslaw' s lost profits now total some $ 300 million, with legal fees now exceeding $ 6 million .
the company that made the attempt to buy inslaw had financial connections to meese and some of meese' s cronies. when the battle ended, inslaw was broke, an attorney, a justice department whistle - blower and a judge were out to work, but inslaw was saved by a corporate giant, ibm, who rescued the company virtually from the auction block .
identification of the customer would have provided current proof of a then - ongoing federal government infringement of inslaw’s promis copyright rights .
on the new allegations brought by inslaw, although the committee conducted extensive investigations, the report did not make any factual findings on the allegations, it did conclude that further investigation was warranted into the statements and claims of inslaw' s witnesses .
report of special counsel nicholas j. bua to the attorney general of the united states regarding the allegations of inslaw, inc
rivenbark, leigh (1988 - 10 - 03) .
inslaw responds to doj appeal amid lengthy court delays
.
( i) contrary to the government' s argument, the first amendment does not bar this court from issuing an injunction to halt doj' s claimed disparagement of inslaw' s product. a demonstration of such disparagement would establish a violation of the automatic stay. inslaw has alleged that actions of the government which disparaged inslaw' s product have caused inslaw grievous injury, and this court must accept those allegations as true for purposes of the motion to dismiss. the government' s reliance upon
inslaw seeks relief against utilization of its claimed property by the government without just compensation. it is inslaw' s simple assertion that doj should make up its mind which if any of the enhancements to promis it wishes to keep and utilize, pay for its use of inslaw' s enhancements, and stop using enhancements if it is not willing to pay for such use .
at & t was initially represented as a creditor in the proceedings by a new jersey lawyer whom inslaw alleges worked against the company' s efforts to maintain financial solvency and
may have aided the unlawful effort of the doj to liquidate inslaw .
inslaw has sent the office of public integrity a lengthy memo on the case, which includes an allegation that meese may have had a role in the ouster of an attorney who was working for inslaw. but the office has declined to investigate meese .
one month later, the u. s. government began to find fault with some of inslaw' s services, and with negotiated billing rates. the government then began to withhold unilaterally each month increasing amounts of payments due inslaw for implementation services .
according to affidavits filed by william hamilton, as the contract details were modified, hamilton then received a phone call from dominic laiti, chief executive of hadron. laiti wanted to buy inslaw. hamilton refused. according to hamilton' s affidavits, laiti then warned him that hadron had friends in government and if inslaw did not want to sell willingly, inslaw could be coerced .
entity tags: william bryant, us department of justice, inslaw, inc. , us district court for the district of columbia
for the relief of inslaw, inc. , a delaware corporation, and william a. hamilton and nancy hamilton, individually .
at & t, however, has said it was not trying to scuttle inslaw .
we deny that there is any substance to inslaw' s allegations that at & t engaged in any improper conduct ,
said at & t spokesman herb linnen .
teel declined to comment on his appointment, bason' s removal, or whether teel would recuse himself from the inslaw case .
the complicated inslaw case began when inslaw filed for bankruptcy protection three years ago. it then alleged that department of justice officials drove it into filing for chapter 11 protection by unfairly stopping payment on a contract inslaw had to develop a computer software program called promis that was used to track cases in u. s. attorney' s offices. it also alleged that the department attempted to stop the company from selling the software to other customers by claiming that the program belonged to the government, rather than inslaw .
following the israeli meeting, the justice department obtained inslaw' s new, 32 - bit, enhanced promis from inslaw at the start of the second year of their implementation contract by modifying that contract and by promising to negotiate the payment of license fees .
to compensate inslaw immediately for the harm that the government had
egregiously
inflicted on inslaw. the republican minority dissented. the committee was divided along party lines 21–13. attorney general thornburgh ignored the recommendations, and reneged on agreements made with the committee .
the inslaw case is still under congressional investigation. the justice department has adamantly refused to cooperate with congressman jack brook' s committee. one justice department official has told a senate committee investigator, that inslaw is dirty and far deeper than watergate ever was .
the growing inslaw software theft is now reaching foreign proportions. while the u. s. house judiciary committee is investigating the theft of inslaw' s promis software by the u. s. justice department, the canadian parliament will commence its own investigation .
a lawyer acting for inslaw warns the justice department that the department’s use of the enhanced version of promis software contravenes bankruptcy legislation. inslaw, in chapter 11 bankruptcy due to a dispute between itself and the department (see february 1985), writes to the department’s contracting officer saying that the software’s use without inslaw’s consent and the payment of licensing fees would contravene inslaw’s property rights and its rights as a debtor in possession of the software under the bankruptcy code. in addition, inslaw argues it is “a wrongful exercise of control over property of the debtor’s estate in violation of the automatic stay now in effect. ” the automatic stay is a legal mechanism that prevents creditors—such as the justice department—harassing a debtor—such as inslaw—in bankruptcy. inslaw also says that the department’s dissemination of the software to third parties could damage or destroy the product’s commercial value, possibly wrecking the company. (us congress 9 / 10 / 1992 )
on february 7, 1985, shortly before completing the contract with the justice department, inslaw filed for reorganization under chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. from the outset of the proceedings in the bankruptcy court, doj represented itself as a major creditor of inslaw .
35. when inslaw was notified that mr. ratiner was leaving d. s. & m. , inslaw filed an application [ p. 425 ] on november 19, 1986, requesting an in - chambers hearing. the application contained the following statements :
the inslaw case is becoming another watergate and involves former attorney general edwin meese, a federal judge, several high officials of the u. s. department of justice and even former white house aide robert c. mcfarlane, who transferred inslaw software to israel .
a lawyer acting for inslaw warns the justice department that the department’s use of the enhanced version of promis software contravenes bankruptcy legislation. inslaw, in chapter 11 bankruptcy due to a dispute between itself and the department (see february 1985), writes to the department’s contracting officer saying that the software’s use without inslaw’s consent and the payment of licensing fees would contravene inslaw’s property rights and its rights as a debtor in possession of the software under the bankruptcy code. in addition, inslaw argues it is “a wrongful exercise of control over property of the debtor’s estate in violation of the automatic stay now in effect. ” the automatic stay is a legal mechanism that prevents creditors—such as the justice department—harassing a debtor—such as inslaw—in bankruptcy. inslaw also says that the department’s dissemination of the software to third parties could damage or destroy the product’s commercial value, possibly wrecking the company. [ us congress, 9 / 10 / 1992 ]
inslaw inc. is a computer software company based in washington, dc, owned by william and nancy hamilton. inslaw markets case management software to courts and related justice agencies, to the insurance industry, to large law firms, and to the law departments of corporations. inslaw' s principal asset is a highly sophisticated software program called promis, a computer program which manages large amounts of information
inslaw v. the united states, no. 95 338 x, 48 c. f. r. § 3. 101 1
inslaw attorney elliot richardson issued a statement saying ,
what i have seen of [ the report ] is remarkable both for its credulity in accepting at face value denials of complicity in wrongdoing against inslaw and for its failure to pursue leads making those denials implausible .
richardson has sometimes suggested that one think of inslaw as three cases - - all of which may be related
concentric circles .
entity tags: us department of justice, house judiciary committee, c. madison “brick” brewer, peter videnieks, inslaw, inc .
in re inslaw, inc. , 88 b. r. 484 (d. d. c. 1988): : justia
10. as a proximate result of rugh' s call to mckain, inslaw' s executives had to spend time calming mckain and overcoming his concern that he would be unemployed within 30 to 60 days, since he had earlier been led to believe by inslaw and its counsel that the chapter 11 process would likely extend for months, if not years, during which time inslaw would be able to continue operating its business. also, inslaw' s executives had to spend time assuring that other employees did not become similarly alarmed. finally, inslaw had to incur legal fees and expenses attributable to efforts by its counsel to investigate and dispute rugh' s claim .
505 f. 2d 1304 (5th cir. 1974). the court left for a later hearing the precise amount due inslaw .
bason ruled that the villain was a fired inslaw employee who went to work for the justice department with a consuming desire for revenge .
schneider also will review inslaw' s plan for bankruptcy reorganization, which includes a joint marketing agreement signed with international business machines corp .
meanwhile, inslaw' s problems with the justice department continue to be scrutinized on capitol hill by the senate permanent subcommittee on investigations .
this will confirm our understanding regarding retention of this firm by inslaw to engage in litigation on its behalf against the united states government .
at the hearing on confirmation, d. s. & m. voted to confirm inslaw' s third amended plan of reorganization .
his replacement, s. martin teel, took over shortly after judge bason announced his oral findings of malfeasance against inslaw by the justice department; teel had been the justice department tax division attorney who had argued unsuccessfully before judge bason for the forced liquidation of inslaw .
inslaw never sold its software to canada, iraq, israel, the central intelligence agency or the national security agency. it also has not been paid by the justice department for its use, despite the $ 6. 8 million ruling in inslaw' s favor .
in re inslaw, inc. , 76 b. r. 224 (d. d. c. 1987): : justia
inslaw’s plans for selling new commercial versions of promis would not have affected the promis implementation contract with the executive office because that contract was, as already noted, to implement an earlier generation of promis that had already been licensed to u. s. attorneys offices. it took a decade for inslaw to begin to understand why the executive office had been so unalterably opposed in 1982 to inslaw’s plans :
senate investigators found no proof for any of these claims. their report noted that the bankruptcy court ruling had not concluded that jensen had engaged in a conspiracy against inslaw and that their own investigation had found no proof that jensen and meese had conspired to ruin inslaw or steal its product, or that brian or hadron were involved in a conspiracy to undermine inslaw and acquire its assets. [ 55 ]
‘ (3) mr. brewer’s attitude toward inslaw, combined with mr. videnieks’ harsh contract philosophy, led to the rapid deterioration of relations between the department and inslaw. any semblance of fairness by key department officials toward inslaw quickly evaporated when mr. hamilton attempted to protect his companies’ proprietary rights to a privately funded enhanced version of the promis software. in a highly unusual move, mr. brewer recommended just 1 month after the contract was signed that inslaw be terminated for convenience of the government even though inslaw was performing under the contract. from that point forward there is no indication that mr. brewer or mr. videnieks ever deviated from their plan to harm inslaw. the actions taken by messrs. brewer and videnieks were done with the full knowledge and support of high level department officials .
inslaw attributed its troubles to an acute bias on the part of brewer, who according to it was intent on running the company out of business. inslaw lodged many complaints of bias and made several requests of doj to investigate these complaints and give some relief from what it perceived to be grossly unfair treatment. doj made no meaningful response to these complaints, and inslaw' s fortunes did not change .
once the software was in the possession of doj, there is no evidence that the government ever negotiated in good faith over the existence of the proprietary enhancements claimed by inslaw. the doj put the entire onus of proof on inslaw, yet never indicated what methodology or proof would be acceptable. the contract entered into by the parties entitled the government to the version of promis then in the public domain. the expert witnesses demonstrate that inslaw did enhance the software with private funds. the contract did not entitle doj to these enhancements. by failing to acknowledge or accept inslaw' s claims, the government continued its fraudulent behavior toward inslaw. this behavior persisted long after inslaw filed for reorganization. doj' s actions constitute a violation of the automatic stay by exercising control over property that rightfully belonged to the estate .
inslaw' s accounting firm, arthur young, has reported inslaw had income of nearly $ 871, 000 on revenue of $ 4. 5 million for the year ended june 30. the company' s legal expenses, however, totaled $ 3. 6 million .
it took a lot of gumption
for bason to rule as he did on the inslaw case, the lawyer said .
i' m frankly concerned as to whether or not there could be any relationship
between bason' s removal and the inslaw ruling .
that is how deep the inslaw computer software case has become. the case started out when the justice department bought promis, a copyrighted software program that helps to track criminal cases throughout the united states. when friends and associates of then attorney general edwin meese attempted to buy the software company, inslaw turned them down and then life was made miserable for inslaw. within 90 days the justice department reneged on their contract with inslaw and refused to pay for the software program, even though it was using it. the justice department is accused by federal judges of attempting to bankrupt inslaw and then hasten the bankruptcy court to declare them insolvent. instead, the courts ruled that the justice department used
fraud, deceit and trickery
against inslaw and awarded the small computer software company $ 6. 8 million in damages .
entity tags: house judiciary committee, inslaw, inc. , us court of appeals for the district of columbia, us department of justice
entity tags: us department of justice, inslaw, inc. , elliot richardson, charles work, jay b. stephens, lowell jensen
entity tags: us department of justice, office of professional responsibility, david bobzein, inslaw, inc. , lowell jensen, robert lyon
‘ (9) the department’s response to inslaw’s requests for investigations by an independent counsel and the public integrity section was cursory and incomplete .
2. during the course of the promis contract, a number of disputes developed between inslaw and doj. while the disputes were pending, and prior to the conclusion of the contract, inslaw filed a petition under chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code on february 7, 1985 .
in march 1982, the justice department awarded inslaw, inc. , a $ 10 million, 3 - year contract to implement the public
william barr appointed special counsel, nicholas j. bua, to advise him on what had become known by 1991 as the inslaw affair .
inslaw v. the united states, no. 95 - 338x, 48 c. f. r. § 3. 101 - 1
all 21 democratic members of the judiciary committee voted last month to ask mr. barr to name a special counsel in the inslaw affair .
in the past, democrats on the committee have been critical of the department' s handling of inslaw, but the report represented a sharp escalation of the nearly decade - old dispute between the justice department and inslaw' s owners, william hamilton and his wife, nancy .
at approximately the same time, murphy privately told hamilton his hypothesis about cia director tenet’s abrupt reversal in march 2001 on settling with inslaw .
the doj response to inslaw was to emphasize that the implementation contract called for a version of promis in which the government had unlimited rights and to ask for information about the enhancements inslaw claimed as proprietary. [ 20 ] inslaw agreed to provide this information, but noted that it would be difficult to remove the enhancements from the time - sharing version of promis and offered to provide the vax version of promis if the doj would agree to limit their distribution. [ 21 ] in march 1983, the doj again informed inslaw that the implementation contract required inslaw to produce software in which the government had unlimited rights, and that delivery of software with restrictions would not satisfy the contract. [ 22 ]
last year, bason accepted inslaw' s contention that thomas j. stanton, head of the executive office of u. s. trustees, also tried to pressure blackshear into helping liquidate inslaw' s assets - - a move that would have put the company out of business .
23. inslaw agreed to the withdrawal of d. s. & m. as special counsel, based upon a mutual loss of confidence. because the withdrawal of d. s. & m. was consensual, inslaw cannot now be heard to complain that it was abandoned .
a second affidavit states that the inslaw software is being used in some 900 offices of the royal canadian mounted police, and in another' as yet unidentified agency or department.' that affidavit is by patricia hamilton, daughter of inslaw' s owners, william and nancy hamilton .
further ordered that inslaw, inc.' s request for an order prohibiting the united states department of justice from filing a proof of claim in the inslaw, inc. bankruptcy be and hereby is denied at this time, without prejudice to inslaw, inc.' s right to object to or request equitable subordination of any such claim that the united states department of justice may hereafter file or otherwise assert; and it is
in an effort to respond to the justice department' s alleged concern over its financial viability, inslaw first offered to provide the justice department with enhanced promis if the government would agree to limit its distribution to the 94 u. s. attorneys' offices and the eousa. the government, however, insisted that under its contract, inslaw must provide software without restriction on distribution. inslaw then offered to put copies of the
inslaw , inc. is a washington , d.c. based information technology company that markets case management software for corporate and government users . inslaw is known for developing promis , an early case management software system . it is also known for a lawsuit that it brought against the united states department of justice in 1986 over promis . inslaw won damages in bankruptcy court , but these were overturned on appeal . the suit resulted in several justice department internal reviews , two congressional investigations , the appointment of a special counsel by attorney general william p. barr , and a lengthy review of the special counsel 's report under attorney general janet reno . inslaw 's claims were finally referred by congress to the court of federal claims in 1995 , and the dispute ended with the court 's ruling against inslaw in 1998 . during the 12-year long legal proceedings , inslaw accused the department of justice of conspiring to steal its software , attempting to drive it into chapter 7 liquidation , using the stolen software for covert intelligence operations against foreign governments , and involvement in a murder . these accusations were eventually rejected by the special counsel and the court of federal claims . 
inslaw, inc. is a washington, d.c. based information technology company that markets case management software for corporate and government users. inslaw is known for developing promis, an early case management software system. it is also known for a lawsuit that it brought against the united states department of justice in 1986 over promis. inslaw won damages in bankruptcy court, but these were overturned on appeal. the suit resulted in several justice department internal reviews, two congressional investigations, the appointment of a special counsel by attorney general william p. barr, and a lengthy review of the special counsel's report under attorney general janet reno. inslaw's claims were finally referred by congress to the court of federal claims in 1995, and the dispute ended with the court's ruling against inslaw in 1998. during the 12-year long legal proceedings, inslaw accused the department of justice of conspiring to steal its software, attempting to drive it into chapter 7 liquidation, using the stolen software for covert intelligence operations against foreign governments, and involvement in a murder. these accusations were eventually rejected by the special counsel and the court of federal claims.
inslaw, inc. is a washington, d.c. based information technology company that markets case management software for corporate and government users. inslaw is known for developing promis, an early case management software system. it is also known for a lawsuit that it brought against the united states department of justice in 1986 over promis. inslaw won damages in bankruptcy court, but these were overturned on appeal. the suit resulted in several justice department internal reviews, two congressional investigations, the appointment of a special counsel by attorney general william p. barr, and a lengthy review of the special counsel's report under attorney general janet reno. inslaw's claims were finally referred by congress to the court of federal claims in 1995, and the dispute ended with the court's ruling against inslaw in 1998. during the 12-year long legal proceedings, inslaw accused the department of justice of conspiring to steal its software, attempting to drive it into chapter 7 liquidation, using the stolen software for covert intelligence operations against foreign governments, and involvement in a murder. these accusations were eventually rejected by the special counsel and the court of federal claims.