'Quebec’s Judge Judy' cleared of misconduct over biography disclosures
Barreau du Quebec finds Anne-France Goldwater did not breach duty of confidentiality to former client who recognized herself in the lawyer's book
The Barreau du Quebec has cleared television host and family lawyer Anne-France Goldwater of misconduct after a former client claimed she was identified without consent in the lawyer’s 2016 biography.
The ex-client claimed Goldwater revealed confidential information about her family and divorce proceedings to Martine Turenne, the author of the lawyer’s biography Plus Grande Que Nature, which translates as Larger than Life.
However, in a recent decision, a three-member panel of the Barreau’s disciplinary board acquitted Goldwater of the charge, finding that most of the information was already in the public domain or had been disclosed to others by the complainant herself.
Media outlets dubbed Montreal lawyer Goldwater “Quebec’s Judge Judy” when she took the starring role in the V network’s show L’Arbitre, a French-language show modelled on the long-running U.S. version, which saw Goldwater deciding small claims disputes between splitting couples.
The show ran for seven years before wrapping up in 2018, but Goldwater had made a name for herself in the province’s family law field long before then as an outspoken and media-savvy practitioner.
She also acted as counsel on two of Quebec’s most prominent family law cases in recent memory: Eric v. Lola, which threatened to revolutionize the support rights of common-law spouses before the Supreme Court of Canada reversed it; and Hendricks c. Québec (Procureur général), which legalized same-sex marriage in Quebec.
According to the Barreau’s ruling, the complainant hired Goldwater’s firm in April 2016, only to terminate the retainer on bad terms less than a year later.
In her complaint to the regulator, the former client alleged she was upset to recognize herself in a passage from Goldwater’s book because she had not shared the fact of her divorce proceedings with many people, and said anyone who knew the pair would be able to identify them as the subject.
The decision says the story in Goldwater’s biography came in a portion when she talked about some of the cases that stood out in her 35-year career, describing a young intellectual who emigrated from Australia to be with her Quebec-based partner, going on to have four children with health problems – including one with a life-threatening condition – before the husband ended the relationship.
In correspondence with her former client, Goldwater admitted drawing the story partially from the woman’s experience, but said that she had also mixed in information from the file of another client she was representing at the time, and never provided “nominative information” about either to her biographer.
“I ‘conflated’ the two stories to make one. I was not trying to relate a specific story,” Goldwater wrote, explaining that both clients had similar family situations and marriage break-ups.
The composite story, she added in evidence at the hearing, was intended to be a more straightforward and easily digestible example for readers of the greater burden assumed by women in relationships.
Friends of Goldwater’s former client and her ex-husband told the hearing that they recognized the couple from the lawyer’s biography, but the three-member Barreau board wrote that they were only able to make the link because they had been told of the legal proceedings and of Goldwater’s retainer by their friends. The lawyer herself never revealed to anyone that she acted for the client, the decision continues.
In any case, the fact that the woman was involved in legal proceedings was in the public domain, via searchable court records, they concluded.
The disciplinary board also found that other information about the client’s past revealed in Goldwater’s book, including her origins in Australia, move to Quebec, marriage to a Canadian and their four sons could not be considered a breach of the lawyer’s duty of confidentiality because they had all been made public by the client herself on the website of an organization she was involved with.
When it came to the comments Goldwater made about the health of the client’s children, the panel found they could be considered a breach of her duties, but that the generic nature of the disclosure did not rise to a level requiring formal discipline.
Follow us on Twitter @CourtReportCA
Story tips or comments to CourtReportCanada@gmail.com