Search

The article presents an update on bar associations in the U.S. as of May 2021. A public reprimand to Arizona lawyer Brooks R. Siegel was issued by the State Bar of Arizona Professional Conduct Board due to professional misconduct. The Idaho State Bar declared the cancellation of the license to practice law of several lawyers due to their failure to pay the 2021 Idaho State Bar license fees. Some of the attorney licenses included in the declaration were reinstated by the Idaho State Bar.

The article focuses on the disciplinary process for litigation attorneys under the New Zealand Lawyers and Conveyancers Act of 2006. Topics include the authority of the Standards Committee, the review process used by complaint review officers, and name suppression in disciplinary cases. Information is provided on the tribunal proceedings of the Disciplinary Tribunal.

The article focuses on Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9, which governs disciplinary complaints against practicing attorneys in the state. Topics include the review of attorney complaints by a disciplinary counsel, how attorneys can respond to complaints, and the dismissal of complaints by the disciplinary counsel.

The article announces the discipline of attorney members of the Idaho State Bar (ISB), which includes the probation of Rocky L. Wixom, the disbarment of D. Scott Summer, and the public reprimand of Matthew R. Aylworth.

The article offers information on the significance of the U.S. Rules of Professional Conduct and case laws in regulating and governing of civil lawyers in the U.S. It discusses the comparative advantages of the rule and case law by analyzing the relationship between them. It informs that the state judiciaries overlook the state disciplinary processes under which lawyers may be disbarred, suspended from practice, or sanctioned for professional misconduct.

The article focuses on the issue of permanent disbarment in Arkansas with reference to the court case In re Madden in which the petitioning attorney Harold Madden was convicted of misprision of a felony. Topics discussed include Madden's lifetime ban from practicing law in Arkansas, Arkansas's procedures governing readmission to the bar along with the strengths and weaknesses of the Madden majority's per se approach to readmission and the dissent's rehabihtative approach to readmission.

The article focuses on the reports of the office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel and the treasurer of the Advisory Committee Fund for the year 2012 presented in the Supreme Court of Missouri. It discusses various disciplinary actions taken including disbarment, stay in suspension orders and a voluntary application filed by a petitioner for withdrawal of reinstatement.

The article discusses a reported backlog of family law-related cases and an increase in the number of self-represented (pro se) litigants in legal proceedings in America as of March 2013, focusing on the 1946 U.S. Supreme Court case Griffin v. Griffin which deals with the divorce of disbarred attorney William H. Griffin, Jr. and his wife Grace Griffin. Other topics include the fraud in the inducement legal theory, annulment, and a writ of certiorari. Alimony is also examined.

The article offers information on judicial changes introduced by the Georgia Supreme Court and the Georgia Court of Appeals in laws related to lawyer-discipline and lawyer's licensure process in Georgia. It reports that the State Bar of Georgia Formal Advisory Opinion Board took actions for defending the responsibilities of the lawyers. It reports that the court has disbarred lawyers for misconduct of law practice in the state.

The article explores the legal, moral, and ethical constraints in the prosecutorial decision making procedure under the analysis of various decision-making theories. It informs prosecutor's license can be disbarred against the prosecutorial sanctions for unethical conduct to protect the public from future abuses of power by prosecutor.

The article presents information on the disciplinary actions taken against several lawyers of Georgia. The disbarment includes lawyer Nerrylle Manning-Wallace based on personal injury case, Scott Michael Herrmann for non delivery of funds to the client's bank and A. Lee Hayes for lack of cooperation. Suspension includes lawyers Charles Matthew Hutt, Scott Chandler Huggins and Michael Lawrence Terrell. Reprimand of lawyers Beryl B. Farri, Jefferson Lee Adams and Dock H. Davis is also discussed.

The article analyzes lawyers' professional responsibilities regarding their nonlawyer assistants. It discusses the duties imposed on lawyers by Model Rule of Professional Conduct 5.3 and state equivalents and explains that Rule 5.3 does not impose vicarious liability on lawyers. It examines special supervisory concerns for lawyers including the employment of family members, the employment of disbarred lawyers as nonlawyer assistants, and the use of private investigators.

The article discusses several disciplinary actions taken against lawyers of Georgia. It discusses the surrendering of license of Stephen Vincent Fitzgerald Jr. based on real estate closing and disbarring of attorney Geoffrey Allan Evans due to his failing to file a Notice of Rejection. It further discusses the suspension of attorney Nikki Giovanni Bonner from law practice for a period of six months. It also states that lawyers failing to file response with investigative panel will be suspended.

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) criminalizes bribery of foreign government officials. The frequency of enforcement actions and severity of fines levied against corporations under the FCPA have significantly increased in the last few years. There is an ongoing problem, however, with the sanctions for FCPA violations: enforcement authorities (the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission) and contracting officials have limited themselves to fines, civil penalties, and occasional imprisonment of individual violators. Debarment from future federal government contracts, even temporarily, is an unused sanction for FCPA violations, even though Congress provided for this punishment by statute. Debarment offers a far more potent deterrent than fines and penalties, as multinational contractors that conduct business with the United States are much less likely to view the sanction as merely a cost of doing business. If ridding foreign markets of corruption truly is a top priority of the United States, it seems both unfair and imprudent for federal agencies to continue awarding lucrative, multi-billion dollar contracts to firms recently prosecuted for fraudulently obtaining them overseas. Enforcement officials shy away from debarring entities that violate the FCPA due to the short-term inconvenience of an agency's inability to transact business with its favorite contractor, its inability to demand favorable bids from contractors when the field of potential bidders has thinned, the resulting job loss, and the risk of over deterring companies that might otherwise pursue lucrative opportunities in emerging markets. This is the "too big to debar "problem--the federal government is too dependent on a particular set of large, private sector corporations for equipment and services. In addition to the virtual immunity from debarment enjoyed by these firms when they violate the FCPA, the fines imposed for engaging in foreign corrupt practices comprise a tiny fraction of the potential revenue generated by lucrative contracts with the United States and foreign states. When discounted by the low probability of detection, these sanctions are far too low to deter unlawful activity. Debarment would deter potential wrongdoers and incapacitate actual offenders. The deterrent would induce more firms to comply with the law, which would allow the "too big to debar" problem to diminish over time. To help illuminate these concerns and lend support to the thesis, this Article will examine the third largest FCPA-related enforcement action to date: the BAE Systems case. On March 1, 2010, BAE Systems paid approximately $400 million in fines for its corrupt practices abroad. In the year that followed, however, the federal government awarded BAE contracts in excess of $6 billion. The United States' refusal to debar BAE because of the potential "collateral consequences" provides a case study on the benefits and drawbacks of deterring foreign corruption through suspension and debarment. This Article concludes that the United States must begin to diversify its portfolio of federal contractors so that prosecutors may leverage the legitimate threat of suspension and debarment to more effectively deter foreign corruption. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the proposal of claimant OPIC Karimum Corp. to disqualify arbitrator Professor Philippe Sands from Great Britain as the case arbitrator due to the lack of ability to be relied on for independent judgement as required under Articles 14(1) and 57 of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). It mentions that the claimant sought clarification on Sands's Arbitration Rule declaration. It also notes the relationship between Venezuela and Bolivia.

The article offers suggestions for attorneys undertaking a bankruptcy representation in the U.S. It is stated that attorneys should follow the standards of acceptable conduct and avoid the violations of complex ethical issues as it can lead to denial of fees, sanctions, suspension and even disbarment from bankruptcy practice.

The article presents several papers discussed during a panel discussion on "Current Issues in Judicial Disqualification" sponsored by the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) Section on Litigation in the U.S. It highlights the critical role of the judicial branch of government to the country's stability. It discusses the federal recusal scheme and the call for First Amendment protection for lawyers who impugn judicial integrity in the context of recusal motions.

The article focuses on the legal ethics surrounding attorney-client sexual relationships. Information is provided on how intimate relationships violate the code of professional conduct standards for attorneys in the U.S. and can provide the basis for appellate review in criminal cases. It is noted that attorneys who engage in such relationships can face sanctions, disciplinary action, and disbarment.

The article focuses on issues regarding the disbarment of impaired lawyers in Minnesota. It examines how lawyer impairment is addressed in the state's disciplinary procedure as well as the hindrance in achieving just and right decisions in cases involving impairment. It discusses the compatibility of compassion and rehabilitation with the aims of lawyer discipline.

The article focuses on the draft recommendations for the Judicial Disqualification Project (JDP) of the American Bar Association (ABA) Standing Committee on Judicial Independence (SCJI) which aims to survey the disqualification rules and practices in the U.S. It states that a new Working Group has been established by SCJI to examine and to propose new recommendations for JDP mentioning that the group focused on the Rule 2.11 under the Model Code of Judicial Conduct. It mentions that a more expansive language concerning several legal terminologies have been proposed by the Working Group. It says that The Working Group welcomes comments and recommendations regarding the draft which can be submitted before April 2, 2010.

The article offers information on the use of screening in New York's new rule, which arouses an argument regarding non-consenting lateral screening. It mentions the features of screening, as well as the topic on attorney versus client, where attorneys may turn against their client by moving to the opposing firm. Aspects of effective screening and disqualification are also given including screening's evolution in courts, the regard for screening as an existing remedy, and judicial perspective of screening effectively. Furthermore, topic on self-regulation with regards to the legal profession and the undifferentiated standards' support of such regulation is provided. The author mentions the necessity of ethical rules in the legal profession which is proven to be vulnerable to recession.

The article presents various cases of lawyer discipline in Georgia from August 15-October 15, 2010, including disbarments, suspensions, and public reprimands. It states that attorney Gary Allen Moss was disbarred by the Supreme Court of Georgia after an alleged failure of remitting the collection agency's portion of the funds collected around September 2008. It notes that the Supreme Court of Georgia ordered the suspension of attorney Kota Chalfant Suttle for two years in the state.

The article focuses on the disciplinary actions taken by the Supreme Court of Georgia against the lawyers which include disbarment of Dianne Cook, suspension of Nakata S. Smith Fitch and public reprimand of Michael Anthony Eddings.

The article presents the reports of the office of the Chief Disciplinary Counsel concerning the disciplinary actions on several lawyers in 2008 in Missouri. It notes on the names of several lawyers with corresponding disciplinary actions taken by the disciplinary counsel including William Kenneth Alderfer, Jr., Roland N. Balzer and Larry Delano Coleman. It also cites the proceedings for reinstatement by the Supreme Court and initiation of the disciplinary action.

The article discusses the blocking of William John Gordon Martin, a Canadian Communist, from becoming a lawyer (barrister and solicitor) by the Law Society of British Columbia. Topics discussed include the qualifications required for admission to the bar in British Columbia, including the Canadian Legal Profession Act, issues of character, and the barristers' and solicitors' oaths. Martin's appeal to the Supreme Court of British Columbia is also discussed, as is, in particular detail, his appeal in 1949 to the British Columbia Court of Appeal (BCCA).

The article looks at the emerging trends in the attorney disciplinary rulings of the North Dakota Supreme Court based on hearing panel recommendations from 2004 to 2007. It outlines the process of disciplining attorneys in the state. It discusses the twenty-one cases addressed by the court on incompetence, fraud, misappropriation, conflicts of interest, unreasonable fees, unauthorized practice, harassment and intimidation and sexual misconduct. It explores how the court imposes sanctions, reprimand and suspension on each violation.

Discusses the Model Rule 8.3 of the American Bar Association (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct which requires an attorney to report misconduct of another lawyer in certain instances. Attempted theories of recovery; Tort of retaliatory discharge; Breach of an implied-in-law contractual term; Prosecution of attorneys for failing to report misconduct.

Examines the guidelines for the reinstatement of disbarred lawyers in the United States. Necessity of good moral character before reinstatement; Importance of debt restitution; Effect of employment during disbarment on the reinstatement.

Focuses on disparities in disqualifying lawyers on the basis of ethical standard set by state and federal courts in the United States. Factors to consider in the disqualifications; Discussion on the American Bar Association Model Rules and Model Code; Implications of a uniform set of ethical rules for the implementation disciplinary standard.

Focuses on the expulsion of law partners. Information on the legitimate use of expulsion against partners in law firms; Incentives given by law firms to avoid wrongful expulsion; Details on expulsion by court order.