Tag-Archive for » Lawyer «

What is this world coming too?  I know attorneys get upset, disgusted and irritated with another attorney at times, but stabbing them?  Come on!!!

schmuhls

Alecia and Andrew Schmuhl

I read an article in the ABA Journal that the suspects Alecia Schmuhl, 30, and Andrew Schmuhl, 31, of Springfield, Virginia, knocked on the door of the home of the victims, Leo and and Sue Fisher, both 61 years of age and stabbed them. The Schmuhls are charged with abduction and malicious wounding, and they remain in custody in Fairfax County.

It seems that Alecia Schmuhl worked for Leo Fisher’s firm beginning in 2013 and recently left the firm. Andrew Schmuhl was a former judge advocate in the U.S. Army.  You can read the ABA Journal article here.

GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

Paralegals and attorneys beware!  According to a recent article in The Recorder, sending that email to the wrong person can be a possible legal malpractice claim in the future.

“Emails sent in certain practices, such as commercial or residential real estate and other commercial transactions, are at a higher risk of being forwarded to third parties without the attorney’s consent. Clients in these areas believe a title opinion or a corporate authority opinion that is good for one purpose is good for all purposes, but forwarding emails and opinions creates risks.

For the attorney, there is the risk that opinions, which were transmitted for a single purpose in a unique context, may be transmitted for use in connection with unintended purposes or unrelated contexts. For the client, there is the risk of the waiver of the attorney-client privilege. And for the recipient, there is the risk of detrimental reliance on an opinion that does not apply to facts and circumstances for which the email was forwarded.”

There are things the legal staff and attorney can do to protect itself in the event this occurs, such as adding content to the email footer that can be automatically attached by the system to every outgoing email. The footer can be used, among other things, to include an attorney-client privilege notice or to address the risks of forwarded emails by putting recipients on notice of the boundaries for acceptable and permissible use of the content of the email.

There are however, no magic words approved by the Court for this purpose.  Also, “Courts have generally held that such a label attached by an attorney means little in deciding whether a communication is entitled to protection under either the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine.”

The opinions of the American Bar Association, the Courts and the many state bar associations have varied on the effectiveness of such a footer. However, it appears there is some increased protection in the liability context if attorneys adopt language in their emails that parallels the inadvertent disclosure language applicable in the discovery context.

In California, generally, where it is evident the client had not made the disclosure, the lawyer did not intend to disclose confidential information and the inadvertently disclosed document was clearly marked as confidential, no waiver will be found. See State Compensation Insurance Fund v. WPS, 70 Cal.App.4th 644 (1999).

In California, once an attorney realizes privileged information has been received, the attorney must immediately notify the sender and attempt to resolve the issue. See Rico v. Mitsubishi Motors, 42 Cal.4th 807 (2007); State Comp. Ins. Fund v. WPS, 70 Cal.App.4th 644 (1999).

“While never sufficient to “un-ring the bell” once the privileged email has been read, inadvertent disclosure instructions can increase an attorney’s ability to potentially obtain some relief after discovery of the problem.”

As stated in this article, “as applied to a footer, the language addressing both the risk of forwarded emails or inadvertent emails might contain the following:

 

NOTICE: This email and all attachments are CONFIDENTIAL and intended SOLELY for the recipients as identified in the “To,” “Cc” and “Bcc” lines of this email. If you are not an intended recipient, your receipt of this email and its attachments is the result of an inadvertent disclosure or unauthorized transmittal. Sender reserves and asserts all rights to confidentiality, including all privileges that may apply. Pursuant to those rights and privileges, immediately DELETE and DESTROY all copies of the email and its attachments, in whatever form, and immediately NOTIFY the sender of your receipt of this email. DO NOT review, copy, forward, or rely on the email and its attachments in any way. NOTICE: NO DUTIES ARE ASSUMED, INTENDED, OR CREATED BY THIS COMMUNICATION. If you have not executed a fee contract or an engagement letter, this firm does NOT represent you as your attorney. You are encouraged to retain counsel of your choice if you desire to do so. All rights of the sender for violations of the confidentiality and privileges applicable to this email and any attachments are expressly reserved.”

The inclusion of the above description serves three purposes.

1) it highlights the communications as protected so an unintended recipient cannot claim he was unaware of the privilege issue until after the email was read; 2) it reinforces the intent to preserve and protect the privileged nature of the communication and makes clear no waiver was intended; and 3),perhaps the most significant, it distinguishes the email from other emails that may not be privileged.

Of course, emails still get read, even where they are unintentionally sent. These two steps—changing the footer and the subject line—at least provide some additional protections from those situations.

The above information can also be found in the book, California Legal Malpractice Law.  I have nothing to do with the writing, editing or distribution of this book.

I think I will be editing my footer immediately.  Hopefully, knock on wood, I will never have to worry about this but I would rather be safe than sorry.

 

GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

According to the ABA Journal, a Connecticut lawyer has been suspended for four months and barred from representing female clients for the rest of his career after he was accused of representing women in family law and domestic-violence cases in violation of a 2010 court order.

The disciplinary counsel had initially sought disbarment for lawyer Ira Mayo, alleging he had violated the court order at least 11 times, the Connecticut Law Tribune reports. Mayo agreed to the suspension and ban on representing women to resolve the disciplinary complaint.

Mayo was accused in two prior ethics cases, according to the Connecticut Law Tribune. In the first he was suspended for 15 months after he was accused of making unwanted advances to female clients referred to him by a group for abused women, the story says. In the second, he was banned from representing women in family law or domestic violence cases after he was accused of offering to waive attorney fees in exchange for a massage.

The short suspension for lawyer Ira Mayo outraged a woman who filed a recent grievance against Mayo after he represented her on assault charges in a domestic-violence case, the Connecticut Law Tribune says. Leah Castro called the short suspension “a slap on the wrist” and told Connecticut Law Tribune she believed he should be disbarred.

Some of the comments on this ruling are below:

“As an attorney, it is clear to me this man should be disbarred.  As a woman, the actions of the Connecticutt Discipline system indicates a problem with their valuation of these issues.  Consider if the discipline would be the same if this man repeatedly made unwanted sexual advances and actions against males.  I think not.  As a retired prosecutor, it is clear this man is a sexual predator.  Another reason to disbar.”

As a young solo practitioner in a small town I took over the office lease from a downsizing sole practitioner who specialized in small divorce actions – great location right across the street from the courthouse. Ground floor storefront + a great brick loft style mezzanine with a skylight.

He said that I could buy as much of the office furniture as I wished except for one piece and he pointed to a cheep looking 3’x3’x3’ laminated cube on which he had placed a coffee maker and cups. Puzzled, I asked “what is it”. He then pulled out a tab and out flopped … a spring loaded single bed. He then looked at me with a mischievous grin and quickly added “I have negotiated many a fee on this bed! It has too much sentimental value for me to part with.

He was not an attractive man; 60; fleshy, paunchy, and red cheeked from 5,000 too many liquid lunches. I was literally speechless.

Apparently this kind of thing used to go on 30 years ago, a lot. Until then I had never heard of the practice.”

“I’m sitting here trying to imagine how a guy like this will fit his predatory predilection into a “men’s rights” style divorce practice, and I fear that the state bar in Connecticut may have created the practitioner’s version of Frankenstein.”

“I’m sure the next time the judge calls for order in the court, every response will end with “. . .and hold the Mayo.””

“Can he represent transgendered clients?”

“Household name divorce lawyer Marvin Mitchelson, who made a name suing actor Lee Marvin for “palimony” (and breaking new ground with the California Supreme Court) was then flooded with palimony cases and leased a upmarket office in Century City office complete with a Jacuzzi soaking tub in an anti-room off of his office. He was later accused by two clients of rape and reputedly had a habit of meeting with clients naked in his hot tub. he was never prosecuted for sexual impropriety.  (He was later sentenced in 1993 to 4 years in prison for tax fraud.)”

I don’t know about any of you, but this “suspension” seems a bit odd and clearly raises some interesting questions about who Mr. Mayo can represent.  I would be interested to know what any of you think of this suspension.

GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

I am sure there are times that attorneys and judges want to go at each other physically, but I never thought we would see it on camera.

Warning, there is profanity in the video.

http://Judge, attorney fight after argument in court

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

In an article I posted at my Family Law blog, California Family Law Paralegal, I discussed violence against attorneys, not only by their own clients, but by an opposing party.

The American Bar Association did a poll of attorneys in the mid-90’s and posted the results in an article titled “Lawyers in Harm’s Way.”  This poll revealed that that 60 percent of family lawyers had been threatened by opposing parties, and 17 percent had been threatened by their own clients.

As violence has continued to increase in our nation, I find it interesting that the American Bar Association has not updated this poll of attorneys regarding threats or actual violence towards them.  I am conducting my own poll and ask that you take a moment and answer it, so we as legal professionals can see for ourselves if threats of or actual violence towards attorneys (including paralegals and other staff members) is increasing.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

I can’t believe it is 2013 and another year has flown by.  This past year has been a busy one, personally and professionally.  So much so, that it has kept me from blogging as often as I would like.  I am going to change that, or at least give it my best ‘college try’ as they say, in this new year.

I became a  great grandmother to a beautiful girl in March 2012, Lexi Jo.  She brings laughter and happiness to all of our lives.  I am blessed to have her in my life and enjoy watching her grow each day. lexi (1)

My family is healthy now, with my youngest son finally getting the insulin pump for his type 1 diabetes.  Seems like we waited for this pump forever.  This has helped to maintain his sugar levels and has prevented his having to be in intensive care on a monthly basis.  I know he is happy about this and as his mother, I am thrilled that he no longer needs to be hospitalized frequently.

Professionally in 2012, the law office expanded by adding one more person to our cast of characters.  She is young, smart and is a fast learner.  She seems to be fitting in nicely with all of us.   Our receptionist was promoted to assist me and begin using her paralegal skills.  I know I am happy as can be with this change, and I know she is as well.  I look forward to teaching her all I know and watching her grow in her new position.  With these changes of course, come some challenges.  Figuring out what job duties change and for whom, is one of the biggest challenges.

I hope that all of my paralegal friends are doing well in this new year and that 2013 brings us all happiness, not only personally, but professionally too.  Happy New Year and I look forward to reconnecting with all of you and hopefully connecting with new paralegals as well!

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share
Category: Family Law, Personal  Tags: , , , , ,  Comments off

Sometimes judges can be funny, (ok, maybe this was not that funny, but I got a chuckle out of it) as evidenced by Judge Lucy Koh last week when she stated, “I mean come on. 75 pages! 75 pages! You want me to do an order on 75 pages, (and) unless you’re smoking crack, you know these witnesses aren’t going to be called when you have less than four hours.”

I don’t think attorney Bill Lee thought Judge Koh was funny when he replied, “Your honor, I can assure you, I’m not smoking crack.”

You can read more of this article here.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

According to the November 30th USAtoday.com article, “Report: Strippers pose as legal aides at detention center”, strippers, as well as South American pole dancers have been posing as paralegals so as to visit rich drug lords at the maximum Federal Detention Center in Miami.

I don’t know about you, but this kind of pi***s me off!! I’ve worked hard (and still do) to get where I am at in my Paralegal Career.  When “women” do these things with the assistance of attorneys who should know better, it makes those of us in law who treasure what we do, look bad. Let’s face it, lawyers are the butt of many jokes and this act done by several attorneys in Miami doesn’t help the image. Yes, I am outraged, but really, working in law as long as I have, I am not really surprised.

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

I have been reading the articles and comments on the recent case in which the rival lawyer Thomas Gooch accused Dmitry N. Feofanov of exploiting his assistant Daniella Atencia‘s assets to “draw the attention of the jury away from the relevant proceedings.” Seems Ms. Atencia is Mr. Feofanov’s wife and he is not happy with the opposing attorney’s comments and antics.

Dmitry Feofanov and Daniella Atencia

 

As a woman, the comments made by some are quite hurtful to Ms. Atencia.  To think that a beautiful woman who happens to be a paralegal, should not assist her attorney in court, is simply ludicrous.  Distracting to the jury? Really? How so?  Simply because she has large breasts?  There is no mention, in what I have read, that says that Ms. Atencia was wearing inappropriate clothing in the courtroom, in fact from the picture here, it looks as if she is professionally dressed.  Does Mr. Gooch think that jurors are really going to be so distracted and enamored with Ms. Atencia’s large breasts that they will disregard the law and facts before them and issue a verdict in favor of Mr. Feofanov?  I highly doubt it and I would think the jurors would be a bit upset with Mr. Gooch for thinking that they are so shallow and impressionable.

To make matters worse, Mr. Feofanov is getting requests for pictures of his wife’s cleavage.

As a paralegal, what do you think of the motion that Mr. Gooch has filed?  I would be very interested to hear from my fellow paralegals, male and female on this one.

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share

Family Law attorney Judith Soley, 65, and her client were gunned down at a Bass Lake restaurant Feb. 16 by the client’s husband, who later turned the gun on himself.  Ms. Soley and Sandra Williamson, 65, her client, were leaving a restaurant during a break in court proceedings when Williamson’s estranged husband, James, began beating Soley, who was in her van at that time, and then shot her in the head.  He chased his wife into the kitchen of the restaurant, where he shot her in the head, before fleeing in a pickup.  Officers later found Williamson in his home, where he died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Ms. Soley was the first woman president of the Fresno County Bar Association, and was active in both legal and community circles and was one of the first women to be certified as a family law specialist by the State Bar.  Ms. Soley became a lawyer when women didn’t frequently join the profession and she built a successful practice and, as a single mother, raised her daughter, who became her law partner.

Judith Soley, Esq.

Ms. Soley used a wheelchair all her life, but traveled the world, including visits to the Great Wall of China, Russia, England and Hawaii, as well as stints in Italy and Mexico to perfect her language skills. She graduated from UCLA and received her law degree from Boalt Hall, beginning her practice in 1971.

Ms. Williamson was a labor and delivery coach for 15 years and Mr. Williamson was a retired Los Angeles firefighter.  Friends of the couple said that Mr. Williamson was manic depressive and refused to take his medication, per reports to them by Ms. Williamson several years ago.  The parties’ divorce was an on again, off again action for the last seven years.  The initial divorce was filed in 2004 and the couple reconciled only to separate in 2007 when Ms. Williamson obtained a restraining order for domestic violence.  In 2010, she tried to have the restraining order renewed but was unable to locate the whereabouts of Mr. Williamson and was unable to have it served.

Sandra Williamson

There was also a civil action between the parties in which Mr. Williamson obtained a loan after he forged his wife’s signature on a deed to gain sole possession of the family home.  Ms. Williamson later had the deed voided in court — but not before Williamson took out a $942,000 bank loan based on the forged deed and transferred the money to a joint account he had with a nephew.  The civil suit was still pending at the time of the divorce proceeding.  This was by no means a simple divorce.  You can read the trial brief here prepared by Ms. Soley, which details the many alleged actions of Mr. Williamson.

Family Law can sometimes become very volatile when dealing with very emotional issues and those of us in family law are aware of the dangers that sometimes occur in divorce and custody matters.  If you talk to a Family Law attorney, you will no doubt hear of some opposing party who has become angry with the soon to be ex’s attorney, and has made some threatening comment or threatened some action against that attorney.

Working in family law, I have witnessed many times when this has occurred and have had to call in police assistance to escort the opposing party out of the law office during heated moments.  One former attorney I worked for has had to be escorted along with the client, from the courthouse to their vehicles by the bailiff, after being threatened in the hallway during negotiations with the opposing party, his counsel and the client.

My thoughts and prayers go out to Ms. Soley’s family and staff and Ms. Williamson’s family and co-workers.

Enhanced by Zemanta
GD Star Rating
loading...
GD Star Rating
loading...
Share