Last week, the prominent Biglaw firm Baker McKenzie initiated a defamation lawsuit in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia against Brooke Radford, a former tax associate. The firm alleges that Radford falsely accused a partner of sexual assault via multiple posts on social media platforms and Reddit, summing to over 80 accusations. Additionally, Radford claimed that the firm attempted to cover up the incident.

According to the legal complaint, Radford asserted that she was assaulted by Maurice Bellan, who is also a plaintiff in the ongoing lawsuit. She further claimed that her dismissal from the firm was a direct consequence of rejecting Bellan's advances. Contrarily, Baker McKenzie presents a different narrative for her termination. The firm stated that Radford's employment was ended in June 2025 due to her making numerous unauthorized personal purchases on a firm-issued credit card, violations of other firm policies, and her refusal to cooperate with the firm's investigation into these matters.

The documents submitted by the firm in the lawsuit also highlight various problematic communications from Radford, including group text messages to fellow Baker tax associates post-termination. These messages reportedly included accusations of oppression against her colleagues, among other grievances.

Post-termination, Radford's communications with Bellan turned threatening, including texts that referenced violent retribution and other unsettling content. Before the firm filed its lawsuit, Radford had indicated plans to pursue legal action of her own, though she has not publicly responded to Baker McKenzie's lawsuit since it was filed.

Baker McKenzie’s spokesperson has described Radford’s allegations as “false, defamatory, and malicious." The firm is seeking both injunctive relief and monetary damages to address the claims made by Radford.

This case highlights the complexities and severe implications of internal conflicts within major law firms, especially when they escalate to public and legal confrontations. The outcomes of this lawsuit could set significant precedents regarding how such sensitive and serious allegations are handled legally and corporately in the future.