His actions at the deposition were described as 'astonishingly unprofessional'
Alex Spiro, a partner at Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, is facing a sanctions motion for his conduct during a Texas deposition without the necessary legal authorization, the American Bar Association (ABA) Journal reported.
According to a motion filed on April 8 by the plaintiff's attorney, Mark Bankston, Spiro, representing Elon Musk, is accused of highly unprofessional behavior during the March 27 deposition. The motion alleged that Spiro, not licensed to practice law in Texas, attended the deposition without pro hac vice permission, which had not been granted at the time of the deposition. His actions at the deposition were described as "astonishingly unprofessional" and include interrupting the deposition with commentary, giving improper instructions not to answer, berating opposing counsel, and mocking the plaintiff’s claims.
Further allegations in the sanctions motion claim that Spiro’s “sense of entitlement” led to his unexpected appearance and his subsequent “outrageous conduct” throughout the proceeding. It is claimed that Spiro's name appeared 170 times in the 110-page deposition transcript, with accusations of him continuously interrupting with “snide and ridiculous commentary” while improperly coaching the witness.
Spiro attempted unsuccessfully to seal the deposition transcript, which contained numerous instances of his disruptive behaviour.
The plaintiff, Benjamin Brody, is involved in a defamation lawsuit against Tesla CEO Elon Musk, alleging that Musk amplified false claims on social media that Brody was an undercover agent in a neo-Nazi group brawl. Brody’s attorney, Bankston, previously won a nearly $50 million verdict against Infowars host Alex Jones.
In response to the motion, Spiro dismissed the allegations as "amateur hour." He suggested that the plaintiff's lawyer was seeking publicity, stating, "I understand this lawyer wants his 15 minutes of fame, but these shakedown tactics won’t work."
According to the ABA Journal, the case continues to draw attention as it involves high-profile figures and raises significant questions about professional conduct within the legal community.
