Baker McKenzie has initiated a defamation lawsuit against former tax associate Brooke Radford, alleging she made false accusations of sexual assault against Maurice Bellan, the head of the firm’s Washington, D.C., office. The firm contends that Radford’s claims, disseminated through social media, are unfounded and have caused reputational harm.
According to the complaint filed in D.C. Superior Court, Radford was terminated in June 2025 for making over 100 unauthorized personal purchases on her firm-issued credit card, including clothing, first-class airfare, and food deliveries. The firm asserts that her dismissal was due to these violations and her refusal to cooperate with an internal investigation. ([news.bloomberglaw.com](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/baker-mckenzie-sues-ex-associate-accusing-firms-dc-head-of-sex-assault?utm_source=openai))
Following her termination, Radford took to LinkedIn, alleging that Bellan had sexually assaulted her and that the firm had covered up the incident. She claimed that her refusal of Bellan’s advances, some of which she described as monetary, led to her dismissal. ([news.bloomberglaw.com](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/baker-mckenzie-sues-ex-associate-accusing-firms-dc-head-of-sex-assault?utm_source=openai))
In response, Baker McKenzie stated that Radford’s public assertions are “false, defamatory and malicious.” The firm is seeking injunctive relief and monetary damages to address the alleged harm caused by her statements. ([news.bloomberglaw.com](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/baker-mckenzie-sues-ex-associate-accusing-firms-dc-head-of-sex-assault?utm_source=openai))
Radford has not publicly commented on the lawsuit. Prior to the firm’s legal action, she indicated plans to pursue legal recourse against Baker McKenzie concerning the alleged assault. ([news.bloomberglaw.com](https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/baker-mckenzie-sues-ex-associate-accusing-firms-dc-head-of-sex-assault?utm_source=openai))
This case underscores the complexities law firms face when addressing internal allegations of misconduct, balancing the need to protect their reputation while ensuring a fair and thorough examination of serious claims.