This is what Joe had to say about Art Webster's disbarment at 7:37 this morning:
I guess the real question is, why they cross the line in the first place? You would think having spent most of their careers seeing the results of poor choices made by their clients would be enough to keep them on the straight and narrow. Nope! I guess when you spend the majority of your day being paid to lie and win, you just might start believing your invincible.
Here's what he had to say at 1:03 this afternoon:
The law states that if you do so, it's grounds for immediate disbarment and that's exactly how the Appeals Court ruled. It's not as if he cheated his Client. He didn't steal from the Client and he didn't lie to his Client. They simply were not pleased with the end results of the Bankruptcy and I'm told the Courts believed he did a fine job handling the actual case. He simply did not handle the funds properly and he's out.
Why didn't Mr. Albero do any investigating on this to begin with? He made Mr. Webster sound like a piece of filth during his first go round. Now, he's an honest man, who made an honest mistake. News blog my ass.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
He probably had not taken his medication first thing.
Either that, or realizing that he had once defended Art Webster and claimed he was going to initiate a joint lawsuit against me with Art, realized he needed to backpedal.
Also, his interpretation that "the court was quite pleased" is a lot off the mark. Imagine shooting an arrow at a target 50 ft away.
Now imagine shooting your toe with the arrow.
Scenario #2 is more like the Art Webster issue. He in fact, did steal money, by not putting it in an escrow account. THAT IS WHY IT IS GROUNDS FOR DISBARMENT.
Gotta agree with Gunpowder Guy. His first post was put up pre pink pill. After that settled into his system, he felt the need to Keep It Real. If you catch my drift.
I agree with GP.
Except "I'll add" [lol] that the Court (Judge Jackson) found and the CSA Opinion affirmed, that Mr. Webster lied to his client of a substantive matter.
Every law student, much less lawyer, knows that diddling with the escrow account is a NO-NO. I mean the FAST track to unemployment. When a lawyer puts a escrow money in his own account he is stealing, because the interest on the escrow account goes to the Client Protection Fund [of the Bar of Maryland].
A lawyer can stand up on his hind feet in the courtroom and dance around the truth all day long, he can make a truthful witness sound like a liar, he can make his lying client look like an angel [he cannot knowing let his client lie on the stand], but he cannot TELL a lie, most especially to his client.
A lawyer is an officer of the Court, and ultimately in Maryland, “The Court”, means the Court of Special Appeals. THEY admit a lawyer to the bar, and they can kick his sorry lying butt out of the bar.
PS to GP:
If we continue to agree, people are going to talk.
Hadley,
I'll just clarify that I am NOT a lawyer, I just read the laws.
I thought the interest was the issue here, but I wasn't sure where it went.
I am just pleased that my predictions this past July-- which raised the threat of a lawsuit -- proved to be correct (as I knew they would... Chief TinyTesticle isn't the only one with sources. Mine are just more reliable).
Post a Comment