Judge denies NASCAR request for rebuke of former Jeremy Mayfield attorney
Related stories:
Jeremy Mayfield changes attorney; Mark Geragos expected to join legal team
Legal wrangling continues in Mayfield-NASCAR case
A U.S. District Court judge has ruled against NASCAR’s request to sanction a former attorney for suspended driver Jeremy Mayfield for an affidavit that misrepresented the background of a Texas drug-testing laboratory operator.
Judge Graham Mullen in Charlotte also denied NASCAR’s request for Mayfield to pay for the sanctioning body’s defense against assertions tied to the affidavit.
The affidavit was from Harvey MacFenerstein, who has said there were mistakes in his credentials and is no longer being used by the Mayfield legal team.
Mayfield also has since changed attorneys, switching from the well-known Charlotte firm of James, McElroy and Diehl to a firm headed by high-profile attorney Mark Geragos.
Paperwork filed in the case Tuesday states that Geragos, who has represented convicted murderer Scott Peterson as well as pop star Michael Jackson, and partner Dan Marino of the Washington, D.C.-based firm Luque Geragos Marino will be representing Mayfield.
Mayfield has sued NASCAR for suspending him for a May 1 drug test that it says was positive for methamphetamines but Mayfield claims produced a false positive reading as the result of the prescription drug Adderall, which is used to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, and over-the-counter allergy medication Claritin-D. Mayfield has denied using methamphetamines several times, while NASCAR has produced affidavits of acquaintances and relatives testifying to his alleged methamphetamine use.
MacFenerstein’s affidavit was used when the case was originally filed May 29 in North Carolina state court and was the basis for a request for a temporary restraining order. The TRO request was denied because there was no way Mayfield could get to practice and qualifying at Dover, Del., that day. The case was eventually moved to U.S. District Court in Charlotte.
In a deposition, MacFenerstein states that he had told former Mayfield attorney John Buric that he was not a licensed doctor and was not a certified medical review officer (someone who evaluates and interprets drug-testing results) as stated in the original affidavit. He said the mistake in that affidavit that he got a bachelor’s degree from Mid Western State University was his and that instead he had taken classes at an Air Force academy that had a relationship with the college.
In his ruling Tuesday on the circumstance surrounding the submission of that affidavit, Judge Mullen said Buric probed MacFenerstein’s qualifications, had reason to believe the qualifications MacFenerstein claimed to have were correct and his editorial oversight on whether MacFenerstein was a medical review officer was likely inadvertent and not serious enough for sanctions.
“[Buric] made a reasonable inquiry into Mr. MacFenerstein’s qualifications, … [and] it was objectively reasonable for [him] to take as truthful Mr. MacFenerstein’s representations in his sworn affidavit,” Mullen wrote.
The decision Tuesday does not impact the case schedule. Mayfield won an injunction July 1 to lift his suspension, but the U.S. Court of Appeals temporarily rescinded that injunction July 24 until a full appeal could be heard. The injunction appeal is tentatively scheduled for Dec. 1-3.
An actual trial in the case will not start until September 2010 at the earliest.
