How Do Craig Tractenberg’s Irresponsible Tactics Benefit Clients?

None of this surprises me. I faced Craig Tractenberg in two arbitrations involving a franchisor who was ethically challenged. In the first case, a former contractor for the franchisor was identified by me in discovery as a potential witness for my client, the former franchisee. Mr. Tractenberg launched into an attack on the witness and threated to sue him on behalf of his client for alleged violation of his confidentiality agreement, conversion of trade secrets and defamation arising out of events a few years earlier if the witness. He sent the following e-mail to the witness (names redacted):

"I am counsel to *********. The purpose of this email is to demand that you cease and desist communications with the business colleagues of ******************* as you have no legitimate purpose for such communications. This is also to advise you that you have defamed **********************, which I will more formally advise you about in a later communication.

We have collected your emails sent to our clients’ business partners regarding the public records of *******************.
Your commentary to some of these emails contain false information regarding *****************. Other of the emails which purport to simply forward public information maliciously cast **********in a false light. Both are actionable as you are motivated to achieve an unlawful result from this targeted communication.

Our investigation shows that you maintain both a **** and **** address; accordingly, I will send the demand letter to both addresses. Please have your counsel contact me regarding a protocol for collecting the emails sent and prohibiting future communications, and the availability of your counsel for a hearing in federal court if we cannot agree to a proper protocol."

I responded:

"Craig: I just got the e-mail chain below from Mr. *******. First, I am very concerned by the threats made by you to Mr. ****** in the e-mails. You never identified the false statements that Mr. *******supposedly made. Therefore I will assume there were no defamatory statements. Otherwise, I do not see how you can prevent Mr. ****** from discussing what he apparently discussed with other persons who contacted him and what he will testify to at trial.. Your e-mails were clearly meant to intimidate Mr. ******* I trust that you will not seek to intimidate him from testifying truthfully at the arbitration. Second, it is apparent that you have a ******* address for Mr. *** which is more than I have so please don’t play games with me. Send me his address, as should have been included in your interrogatory answers and I will verify that it is still current.

Frankly, I continue to be appalled at your repeated conduct. It is clear that you are doing what you can through threats and intimidation to keep people from talking about ***********and **********how far they can go. Remember, litigation is not a game and it is certainly not a situation where all is fair and anything goes. "

He went ahead and sued this witness who was intimidated and ended up not testifying. The allegations included violation of the computer abuse and fraud act, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with contract, conversion of confidential information, breach of contract and conversion, After my arbitration was over, the suit was dismissed. Mission accomplished.

As alluded to in this e-mail, there were other instances where I found Mr. Tractenberg's conduct to be inappropriate but this suffices for now.

I do not wish ill against any lawyer. I understand the pressures he is under to produce for his clients and his firm and to prove his worth to them. However, we lawyers are supposed to be professionals and held to a higher standard than others by the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Harry Rifkin