In an article titled Courts Grapple With In-House Atty Whistleblower Suits, Law 360 quotes Jason Zuckerman about the challenges that in-house attorneys face in pursuing whistleblower retaliation claims. The article states in part:
The claims can be acrimonious because the attorneys feel they were doing the right thing to get the company to comply with the law, and the company feels betrayed by a trusted adviser, said Jason Zuckerman . . . .In-house counsel who blow the whistle are never eager to do so, said Zuckerman, the plaintiffs lawyer. They feel they have no other choice to expose misconduct at their companies and essentially destroy their careers in the process, he said. “It’s not easy for in-house counsel to proceed with these suits. It really takes a lot of courage,” Zuckerman said.
Allowing in-house counsel to pursue whistleblower claims would lead to greater exposure of corporate malfeasance, he said, speculating that attorneys at Lehman Brothers and other scandal-ridden companies must have known what was going on but chose to look the other way. “I think that it is important in certain instances for in-house counsel to draw a line in the sand, and act not only as an officer of the corporation, but also has an officer of the court,” he said. “If they put themselves on the line and get their head chopped off, it’s important that they can bring a claim.”