Employee who sued over firing is accused of misusing resources

A former University employee who recently accused Penn of allowing a professor to test unsafe radioactive material on humans now faces accusations that he himself improperly used his University office to run a private consulting business. Mark Selikson, 47, sued the University in September in Philadelphia Common Pleas Court, claiming it fired him last February as director of the Radiation Safety Office in retaliation for exposing a Medical School professor's alleged safety violations. But the University filed a countersuit October 15 denying the charges and claiming it fired Selikson because he used University equipment and employees to run an imaging consulting business, earning about $220,000 over seven years. The findings came from an internal investigation lasting "several weeks," the University claims. Selikson denied some of the charges in his original lawsuit, and his attorneys are filing an official response to the University's suit today, according to his lawyer Bill Haller. "Dr. Selikson believes that his consulting activities in no way conflicted with activities at the University," Haller said, adding that "literally scores" of faculty members and staff have or work for consulting businesses. Hospitals and other businesses that use radiation diagnostic equipment paid Selikson's company, J.A.S. Consulting Inc., to "make sure they're up to snuff" on federal regulations, Haller said. But in order to conduct business, the University charges, "Selikson misappropriated and grossly mismanaged University resources, including time, equipment, employees and other resources, for his own personal gain, permitted the unauthorized copying of software and otherwise breached his duty of loyalty to the University. "The University discharged Selikson for these and other legitimate reasons," University court documents state. Selikson's original lawsuit described the University's claims as "baseless." Additionally, the University accuses Selikson of "attempting to intimidate, harass and otherwise influence RSO employees" during the University's investigation. Selikson's lawsuit, however, describes the investigation as a "seven-week witch hunt" in which officials "resorted to extended interrogations of members of the RSO staff, threatening them with discharge if they did not respond 'properly' to questions concerning Dr. Selikson." A pretrial conference is scheduled for November 17 at 9 a.m. in the chambers of U.S. District Court Judge Raymond Broderick. Broderick is expected to set a schedule for the lawsuit. The case was sent to U.S. District Court October 8 because the University was accused of violating federal law. The two sides dispute whether the case should be heard in Common Pleas Court -- a branch of the state court system -- or federal court, where cases tend to move faster. Selikson's attorneys, who claim the case centers around a violation of state law, filed a motion last week asking for the case to be remanded back to Common Pleas Court. "By discharging Dr. Selikson for carrying out his statutory obligations under federal law, the University has endangered the public health and safety and violated the clear public policy of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania," his lawsuit states. But University attorney Alan Berkowitz said that "if a case involves a federal question, then it's entitled to be brought in federal court." "This case really involves interpretations about federal law," he said.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.