Pa. Judge Bans Atty Exposed To Virus For Coming To Court

By Dorothy Atkins
Law360 is providing free access to its coronavirus coverage to make sure all members of the legal community have accurate information in this time of uncertainty and change. Use the form below to sign up for any of our weekly newsletters. Signing up for any of our section newsletters will opt you in to the weekly Coronavirus briefing.

Sign up for our Corporate newsletter

You must correct or enter the following before you can sign up:

Select more newsletters to receive for free [+] Show less [-]

Thank You!



Law360 (August 10, 2020, 6:37 PM EDT) -- A Pennsylvania judge chastised a local attorney who was exposed to COVID-19 for using the pandemic as a tactical weapon and banned her from entering county courthouse facilities after she ignored the court's directive and showed up for a hearing in person even though her son had the virus.

In a one-page July 31 order, Lancaster County President Judge David L. Ashworth prohibited Wendy Chan of Chan & Associates, a family and immigration law practice, from entering Lancaster County courthouse facilities until she can prove she and her family are in the clear and have quarantined for two weeks. The judge also ordered that "reasonable accommodations" be made so Chan can continue to represent her clients and conduct business remotely.

In a July 31 letter to Chan, the judge wrote that the attorney had shown a "complete failure to comprehend the seriousness nature of the coronavirus pandemic," according to a copy of the letter posted on LancasterOnline, a local news website owned by LNP Media Group Inc.

Last month, Chan had informed Lancaster County Judge Craig W. Stedman that her son had tested positive for the virus. As a result, Judge Stedman instructed Chan and her opponents to hold a hearing remotely, and he declined to continue the hearing despite Chan's objections, the letter said.

However, on July 30, Chan walked into the courtroom when the hearing was scheduled "to everyone's surprise," without giving Judge Stedman or her opponents advanced notice, Judge Ashworth's letter said. She also did not provide the court with documentation of her son's health status or her own COVID-19 tests, according to the letter.

Judge Stedman immediately continued the hearing and told Chan to go home, but she refused to leave the building and was eventually escorted outside by sheriff's deputies, the letter said. Judge Ashworth noted he has reviewed the emails Chan sent to Judge Stedman following the incident defending her actions.

"Notwithstanding your personal beliefs about the 'overly broad Dept. of Health guidance' or the fact that there was 'no legal requirement' for you to disclose your COVID exposure, you blatantly chose to disregard Judge Stedman's clear instructions," the letter said.

Judge Ashworth added that Chan's "transparent manipulation" of the circumstances is "most alarming." She had tried to force a delay in her client's case, apparently because she disagreed with the trial judge's decision to hold the hearing remotely, the letter said.

"You chose to use the pandemic as a weapon to achieve a tactical advantage," the letter said.

Judge Ashworth pointed out that Chan also appears to misunderstand public health guidelines. She had argued that she did not pose a health risk, because the last day her son could be contagious was July 26. If that's true, Judge Ashworth wrote, she should have quarantined for two weeks starting July 26 to ensure she's not contagious.

"Considering your irresponsible behavior and flagrant disregard of Judge Stedman's directives, I have no alternative but to issue the attached order prohibiting you from entering any court facilities until further order of the court," the letter said.

In order to enter the facilities in the future, Judge Ashworth wrote that Chan will have to submit proof of negative COVID-19 tests for her, her son and anyone else she lives with. She will then have to wait two weeks after receiving the negative test results before she's allowed to request to return, the letter said.

Chan has since asked Judge Ashworth to reconsider his order banning her from the facilities. The judge set a hearing on her request for Aug. 10, which will be held via the Lifesize video conference application, according to the docket.

Chan and her law firm didn't immediately respond Monday to requests for comment.

Chan is representing herself.

The case is In re: Wendy Chan, case number CI-20-05137, in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.

--Editing by Janice Carter Brown.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.

Attached Documents

Useful Tools & Links

Related Sections

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!