The original grievance, which was filed with the State Bar of Georgia, included pages of exhibits in which the attorney admitted in open court that he was unable to properly advise his clients because of an existing conflict.
Reviewing the documents, the incident arose in the context of a lawsuit where the attorney jointly represented multiple clients, who were defendants in a lawsuit. The plaintiff extended an aggregate settlement offer to all of the defendants, only to later discover that the attorney withheld the settlement offer from most of the clients. In the attorney's own words, the settlement offer "was presented to the people that have authority to make the decisions[,]" likely referring to the insurance company.
Upon discovering that defense counsel withheld the aggregate settlement offer from his clients, the plaintiff extended a second settlement offer to only one of the named defendants. In that second offer, the plaintiff offered to dismiss that defendant in exchange for her truthful testimony against her co-defendants. That offer placed the defendant in direct conflict with her co-defendants, and the attorney freely admitted as follows:
once that offer came over, I cannot advise her since I represent the other defendants whether she should or shouldn't testify against the other defendants.
Given these circumstances, plaintiff's counsel filed a grievance against defense counsel for: (a) withholding a settlement offer from his clients; and (b) continuing with representation in the face of an impermissible conflict-of-interest.
In response, Mr. Jonathan Hewett, the Senior Assistant General Counsel for the State Bar of Georgia "completed [his] review of [the] grievance against attorney." Despite defense counsel's admissions, Hewett found that "[u]nder the circumstances, a violation of Georgia's ethics rules is not presented."
In commenting about this grievance, one law professor noted:
It comes as no surprise that the reputation of the legal profession is tarnished. First, we have attorneys that disregard their ethical obligations to the client by withholding settlement offers from the client. And, then, we have the State Bar of Georgia turning a blind eye to these violations.
Commenting further, the professor stated:
I have asked my colleagues and my students whether withholding a settlement offer from a client is an ethical breach, and uniformly they answered "yes." I then asked if offering one client to testify against another client creates a conflict-of-interest, and they saw no way of reconciling that conflict.
In further discussing the issue, the professor noted:
What makes this even worse is that a fellow member of the bar filed the grievance. This was a situation in which one of its own members self-policed the profession to uphold the integrity of the profession. Yet, the State Bar of Georgia dismissed the grievance outright. If that low standard is what the Georgia Bar requires of its attorneys, then why should the public expect anything more?
Investigating further, we noticed that the State Bar of Georgia regulations require "[t]hose grievances which appear to allege any violation of . . . State Bar Rules shall be forwarded to the Investigative Panel or a subcommittee of the Investigative Panel according to Rule 4-204.1." Since such an investigation is mandatory, the only reasonable conclusion that we can draw from Mr. Hewett's dismissal of the grievance is:
(a) withholding settlement offers from clients is not a violation of the State Bar Rules; and
(b) representing multiple clients, where one has been offered a release for testimony against another client, is not a violation of the State Bar Rules.
Since the State Bar of Georgia has set such low standards, it will be interesting to see how the State Bar of Georgia will discipline other attorneys that engage in similar behavior without exposing itself to allegations of disparate treatment. And, any disparate treatment will be especially problematic if it falls along racial boundaries.
In follow-up stories, we will report on the specifics of this grievance.
Reporting for Traton News,
Ingrid Ingram.
2 Reader Comments:
Dig deeper and youll find several other incidents that went over looked and ignored by the State Bar of Georgis. A District attorney being present in a few drug deals that were audio taped but the drug enforcement but yet ignored by the state bar. THe President of the State Bar of Georgia's brother in Douglasville or Villa Rica who stole thousands of dollars from clients but yet was not reprimanded except by being told he was forbidden to run for office in Georgia ( he ran the following year.) Sadly, the State Bar of Georgia go after the honest attorney's who suffer from disabilities, in spite of clear evidence by their own experts confirming the disability. In my situtation, I even called the attorney's assistance hotline as well as hand delivered a letter requesting help (with a receiving signiture)to Jenny Middleman, Paula Fredrick and Mr. W. Smith himself. Thank God for phone records and recorders.
Has anyone heard of the American Disabilties Act??? Im confident that when this corrupt behavior gets exposed, I not only will be permitted to practice, I shall recoup the $200k in needless attorny fees Ive paid to fight them. Just maybe I could start giving my money to the only person that unfortunitly really got hurt, the client. She seems to be the only one that continues to lose. The politics of the State Bar of Georgia is just this:, ITS WHO YOU KNOW . Clearly they do not protect the client's interest, JUST THEIR OWN Its not over till ALL the fat lady's sing.
Thanks for sharing this one. Keep posting this kind of a topic.
Cape Coral Rental Management
Post a Comment