[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 102 (Friday, July 29, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: July 29, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
INSLAW
______
HON. CHARLIE ROSE
of north carolina
in the house of representatives
Friday, July 29, 1994
Mr. ROSE. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing legislation for the
relief of INSLAW, Inc. and William and Nancy Hamilton, the owners of
INSLAW. These citizens have been grievously harmed by acts and
omissions of our Government for more than a decade. Justice Department
officials at the highest levels have taken the Hamiltons' property and
used it without compensating them for its use and have thwarted their
every attempt to obtain justice.
INSLAW, Inc. is a computer software company based in Washington, DC,
and owned by William and Nancy Hamilton. INSLAW markets case management
software products to courts and related justice agencies, to the
insurance industry, to large law firms, and to the law departments of
corporations. INSLAW's principal asset is a highly sophisticated
software program called PROMIS, a computer program which manages large
amounts of information.
In 1982, INSLAW won a 3-year, $10 million contract with the
Department of Justice to install case management systems in the U.S.
attorney's offices. The company soon became enmeshed in a series of
contract disputes when the Justice Department began withholding
increasingly large amounts of money until INSLAW was forced to file for
chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1985. INSLAW survived bankruptcy and emerged
from chapter 11 with a loan from the IBM Corp., and INSLAW business
partner.
INSLAW filed suit against the Justice Department in U.S. Bankruptcy
Court in June, 1986. On September 28, 1987, Judge George Bason of the
Bankruptcy Court ruled that the Justice Department ``took, converted,
stole'' INSLAW's software through trickery, fraud, and deceit and
thereafter unlawfully attempted to cause INSLAW's liquidation.
In November 1989, senior U.S. District Judge William Bryant of the
District of Columbia affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's $8 million
judgment against the Justice Department, ruling that ``[t]he cold
record adequately supports his findings under any standard of review.''
The U.S. District Court decision was reversed by the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia in May 1991 on technical
jurisdictional grounds. The Appeals Court ruled that INSLAW had
proceeded in the wrong court.
INSLAW proceeded pro se on its contract claim before the Board of
Contact Appeals, but thereafter took a dismissal with prejudice because
the Hamiltons' financial resources were totally exhausted and they were
unable to run their business and proceed pro se against the Department.
Simply stated, the Department of Justice used its overwhelming
resources to bring the Hamiltons to their knees.
On September 10, 1992, the House Judiciary Committee, completing a 3-
year investigation, made the following statement in its report (H.
Rept. 102-857), The INSLAW Affair:
The Committee's investigation largely supports the findings
of two federal courts that the Department ``took, converted,
stole'' INSLAW's enhanced PROMIS [software] by ``trickery,
fraud and deceit'' and that this misappropriation involved
officials at the highest levels of the Department of Justice.
According to sworn testimony before the Committee, high level Justice
Department officials conspired to steal the PROMIS software and
secretly convert it to use by domestic and foreign intelligence
services. The Committee noted in its report:
This testimony was provided by individuals who knew that
the Justice Department would be inclined to prosecute them
for perjury if they lied under oath. No such prosecutions
have occurred.
The Committee found that high level Justice Department officials knew
INSLAW's claim of PROMIS software ownership was legitimate and that the
Justice Department would ``probably lose the case in court on this
issue.'' The Committee found it ``incredible that the Department,
having made this determination, would continue to pursue its litigation
of these matters.'' The Committee's report stated that--
The Justice Department continues to improperly use INSLAW's
proprietary software in blatant disregard of the findings of
two courts and well established property law.
The September 10, 1992, House Judiciary report contained a number of
findings and recommendations adverse to the Justice Department. In one
of its most important conclusions, the report stated:
Based on the evidence presented in this report, the
Committee believes that extraordinary steps are required to
resolve the INSLAW issue. The Attorney General should take
immediate steps to remunerate INSLAW for the harm the
Department has egregiously caused the company. The amount
determined should include all reasonable legal expenses and
other costs to the Hamiltons not directly related to the
contract but caused by actions taken by the Department to
harm the company or its employees. To avoid further
retaliation against the company, the Attorney General should
prohibit Department personnel who participated in any way in
the litigation of the INSLAW matter from further involvement
in this case. In the event that the Attorney General does not
move expeditiously to remunerate INSLAW, then Congress should
move quickly under the congressional reference provisions of
the Court of Claims Act to initiate a review of this matter
by that court. (Emphasis supplied.)
After years of wrongs and numerous acts of coverup and denial, the
Department of Justice now stands unrepentant in the face of compelling
evidence that it has dealt with citizens of this country in the most
egregious way.
Mr. Speaker, we need to move now to refer this matter to the U.S.
Court of Federal Claims so that the Hamiltons and INSLAW can get a fair
hearing under the congressional reference procedure and finally obtain
the justice which has been so long denied.
____________________