Ex-Paxton Aides Accuse Deputy of Witness Tampering in Impeachment Case

Several former and current top aides of Attorney General Ken Paxton are trading explosive accusations in legal and administrative filings, the latest of which alleges that Paxton's right-hand deputy obstructed justice and tampered with witnesses during his 2023 impeachment.

The public feud could become a distraction for Paxton just as he’s overcome a series of legal troubles, including the impeachment charges, which he was acquitted of by the Texas Senate, and as he launches his bid to unseat U.S. Sen. John Cornyn in next year’s Republican primary.

READ THE LATEST SUIT: Stone Hilton v. Webster complaint

READ THE BAR COMPLAINT: Stone Hilton complaint to State Bar against AAG Brent Webster

The new allegations — detailed in a suit filed Wednesday in federal court in Austin by former Solicitor General Judd Stone and Chris Hilton, the former chief of the general litigation division — include claims that current First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster threatened to fire employees if they gave testimony during the impeachment proceedings that was unfavorable to Paxton. The claim has not previously been reported, and Webster did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

It’s not clear if the claims were ever raised to law enforcement; Webster has not been charged with any criminal wrongdoing.

The first lawsuit was filed last month by Jordan Eskew, a former executive assistant for Stone and Hilton, against the two men and their private law firm. Eskew accused Stone of sexual harassment on multiple occasions in 2023 when she had taken leave from Paxton’s office to work for Stone and Hilton as private attorneys representing Paxton in the impeachment trial. She also claimed Hilton failed to protect her and that the two created a hostile work environment.

READ ESKEW'S SUIT: Jordan Eskew v. Stone Hilton PLLC Amended Complaint

A spokesperson for Stone and Hilton’s law firm has called Eskew’s suit “a complete fabrication” and said that it was pushed by Paxton’s top deputy, First Assistant Attorney General Brent Webster, who has a “personal vendetta” against Stone and Hilton. Webster and Eskew are still working at the attorney general’s office.

This week, Stone and Hilton shot back with a suit of their own against Webster and other attorney general staffers, not including Eskew, and a bar complaint against Webster.

They claim Webster tried to damage their careers by lying about them and encouraging Eskew to file her sexual harassment suit.

Stone and Hilton also claimed in the filing to the State Bar of Texas that Webster tried to tamper with potential witnesses for Paxton’s impeachment proceedings by pressuring them to give favorable testimony or “to flee the state to evade being subpoenaed to disclose information harmful to Webster.” It does not specify which people were targeted.

Webster also demanded that Stone and Hilton “disclose confidential information” during the impeachment proceedings, which would have violated their professional obligation to Paxton, according to the bar complaint.

When they refused to share the information, the complaint alleges, Webster threatened retaliation against them and the firm.

The bar complaint also alleges Webster abused the power of his office by, in part, leveraging meetings with private citizens and lawyers to try to obtain future lucrative employment and harm his enemies.

The Bar’s law office will now review the complaint and decide within the next 30 days whether the allegations amount to professional misconduct, and if so, it will conduct an investigation.

The harassment claims

Eskew’s lawsuit claims Stone made a sexual comment and yelled at her several times at their law firm, and Hilton stood by and did nothing.

She alleges that Stone responded to her statement at a work lunch that a shot of alcohol was “the most disgusting thing I have ever tasted” by saying, “I highly doubt that is the most disgusting thing that has ever been in your mouth.” Hilton, according to the complaint, did nothing but wince and laugh uncomfortably.

It also described a situation in which Stone and Hilton berated Eskew for taking too long to get a BBQ lunch to the staff and multiple other occasions in which Stone yelled at her and other female employees. It alleged Stone called her “white trash” because she was wearing turquoise earrings and that he asked her to buy alcohol and make drinks as part of her job duties.

One time, the suit alleges, Stone told her: “If anyone else makes a comment about my drinking, they’ll be fired.” Another time, he told her that at his firm, “you can say whatever slurs you want.”

The Texas Workforce Commission previously determined that Eskew had grounds to bring a harassment suit, and in a filing to the TWC, Stone admitted to making the comments but “denied the sexual nature” of them, according to Eskew’s suit.

Stone, Hilton and Eskew were among the lawyers who took leave from the attorney general’s office in 2023 to represent Paxton during the impeachment. Eskew claims that upon their return, they were asked to resign after she raised concerns about their behavior during the impeachment period. They deny that they were forced to leave, and their suit suggests they left because of their differences with Webster. Stone and Hilton declined an interview request for this story.

Four other lawyers who returned to the attorney general’s office after working at Stone and Hilton’s private firm during the impeachment process have entered into paid settlement agreements that prohibit them from disparaging the firm owners, according to the suit, though it does not say when. They agreed to a statement saying the lawyers “parted ways professionally” and “amiably” with Stone and Hilton. Eskew refused to agree to the statement, according to the suit.

The Webster connection

Webster wasn’t a plaintiff in Eskew’s suit, but he indicated in an internal email cited in the complaint that two women who worked with Stone and Hilton told him they were afraid of potential assault or further harassment by the men.

Webster also wrote that he had heard from one of the women that Stone had openly fantasized about Webster being harmed and as a result, Webster feared for his and his family’s safety.

Stone and Hilton denied Webster’s account and all accusations of sexual harassment in Eskew’s filing. They claim Webster was angry with them for pushing to get access to records after they left that they believed would expose wrongdoing.

“The email is nothing more than retaliation against Plaintiffs for their refusal to play ball with a corrupt public official,” their suit reads. “Webster sent the email in response to Plaintiffs’ efforts to obtain documents that would prove his corruption.”

Eskew’s lawsuit has caused Stone and Hilton “significant embarrassment and a loss of standing in their professional and personal circles — just as Defendants intended,” they write in their suit.

Days after Eskew’s suit went public, Stone stepped down from the Federal Judicial Evaluation Committee, a panel of attorneys who screen judicial candidates for Texas’ two senators, saying he did not want “the recent false and scurrilous accusations against me to overshadow the committee,” according to Bloomberg News.