Irvington ghostwriter demands $97,750 from federal judge

An Irvington ghostwriter is suing a renowned federal circuit court judge for allegedly reneging on a book deal.

David A. Kaplan accused David S. Tatel of breach of contract, in “the unfortunate last chapter of a close working relationship now ended,” in a complaint filed June 27 in U.S. District Court, White Plains.

The allegations are “false, misleading and meritless,” attorney Greg Silbert, of Weil, Gotshal & Manges in Manhattan, stated in an email on behalf of the judge.

Kaplan was formerly the legal affairs editor for Newsweek magazine. He teaches graduate-level journalism at New York University and City University of New York.

He has written several books, including “The Accidental President,” an account of the Bush-Gore election dispute that was the basis for an HBO docudrama, and “The Most Dangerous Branch: Inside the Supreme Court’s Assault on the Constitution.”

Tatel was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1994, to replace newly appointed Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Now 81, he has been working on senior status and with a lighter caseload for the past year.

He was diagnosed with a retinal disease as a teenager and by his early 30s had gone blind.

“For a judge who can’t see, he sees everything,” constitutional law professor Steve Vladeck said in a Washington Post profile in 2021. “Not just what is going on in the case before him, but how it matters in the future. … It’s hard to think of a judge who is more highly respected on the federal appellate bench even by those who disagree with him.”

A year ago, Kaplan agreed to ghostwrite Tatel’s memoir, tentatively titled “Vision: A Life in Law, A Life of Blindness,” to be published in 2024.

Tatel, according to the complaint, agreed to pay Kaplan $170,000, and if the deal was terminated for any reason, a pro rata portion of the fee.

The final draft was due on June 1.

From June 2022 to this past March, Kaplan says, he worked on the project mostly full-time. He strived to get Tatel to commit to the stories he wanted told and the “voice” in which to tell them.

Writer and judge continually conferred, the complaint states, and Kaplan made many revisions based on Tatel’s suggestions.

Kaplan says he synthesized interviews, oral histories, and the judge’s judicial opinions, writings and speeches “to create an engaging, inspirational narrative for a lay audience.”

Last October, Kaplan sent Tatel a draft of the first five chapters. The judge, according to the complaint, wrote in an email that the work was “terrific at so many different levels.”

In January, Kaplan sent Tatel the first complete draft, 96,000 words and 23 chapters, including revisions based on the judge’s comments about the first five chapters.

Tatel responded by email that it was “pretty amazing,” the complaint states. The publisher wrote to Tatel that the draft was “highly polished” and “almost ready to go to the printer.”

Kaplan made more revisions, and on March 19 submitted a second full draft.

On April 4, according to the complaint, Tatel’s wife emailed Kaplan that she and the judge were working on the draft and their goal was to return it by the end of the month.

Instead, the complaint states, Tatel terminated the contract by email on May 4. For the first time, Kaplan alleges, the judge raised concerns about organization, clarity and accuracy.

Tatel also complained about the many hours he and his wife were devoting to the manuscript, according to the complaint, “not acknowledging that such time was precisely what a memoirist was supposed to be committing in the last stages of a memoir’s creation.”

Kaplan estimated that he had completed 95% of his work, so his pro rata share under the deal’s termination clause is $161,500. Tatel had already paid $63,750, leaving a balance of $97,750, and that is what Kaplan is demanding for the alleged breach of contract.

Silbert said Tatel will not be litigating the dispute because the parties have agreed to a consensual resolution.

“But if he did, he would counterclaim against David Kaplan for breach of their collaboration agreement. The counterclaims would allege that Kaplan breached the agreement by delivering work of poor quality, requiring massive and substantial revisions, corrections, and the abandonment of several chapters.”

Kaplan trained as a lawyer, has not practiced for decades but is representing himself in this case.