Nominees Announced for 10TH Judicial Circuit
Headline Legal News | 2008/03/27 15:54

fter consultation with The Florida Bar and general counsel for Gov. Charlie Crist, the 10th Circuit Judicial Nominating Commission met on March 24, 2008, and named additional nominees for the two circuit judge positions made vacant by the retirements of Judges Ralph Artigliere and Susan Roberts.

These additional nominees are: Mark H. Hofstad, Robin Matis-Jackson, and Donald E. Ratterree.

The following is a complete list of nominees for the three pending judicial positions (in alphabetical order):

David R. Carmichael
Angela J. Cowden
Mark H. Hofstad
Robin Matis-Jackson
Michael E. Raiden
Donald E. Ratterree
Ryan Christopher Rodems
Keith P. Spoto
Ronald N. Toward



State bar hears from Supreme Court candidates
Headline Legal News | 2008/03/20 15:03

Four of the five candidates for West Virginia's Supreme Court believe it faces several serious threats to its integrity and reputation.

A declining number of opinions, allegedly unfair treatment of businesses and civility among the justices were among the issues cited at a Wednesday forum hosted by the state's bar association.

Two court seats are up this year. All five hopefuls attended, including Chief Justice Elliott "Spike'' Maynard.

The sole incumbent running, Maynard defended the level of discourse among the court's five justices and the quality and quantity of their opinions.

"I don't know any judge who misbehaved in the conference room,'' Maynard said. "I think the written product is as good as any court's in the land.''

Maynard has made national headlines following the release of photos showing him in Monaco with the chief executive of a coal company with cases pending before the court. He has since disqualified himself from at least three cases involving Massey Energy Co.

Fellow Democrat Menis Ketchum was asked about the court's method for handling recusal requests. A Huntington lawyer, Ketchum advocated an independent panel to resolve such issues.

While court rules require judicial officers to recuse themselves from "a proceeding in which the judge's impartiality might reasonably be questioned,'' it also gives that judge the final say.



Kentucky Bar Association investigates two presidents-elect
Headline Legal News | 2008/03/14 16:29

In two unrelated cases, the Kentucky Bar Association is investigating alleged ethics violations by its own future president as well as another lawyer who was slated to become president of the Louisville Bar Association next year.

The two accused attorneys have responded quite differently.

Maria Fernandez, who was president-elect of the Louisville Bar Association, said in an interview that she resigned last week to avoid embarrassing the bar over a court's ruling that she charged an excessive fee in settling the estate of Claudia Sanders, the widow of the Kentucky Fried Chicken founder.

But Barbara Bonar, the KBA's president-elect, said she plans to assume the presidency of the 15,544-lawyer state organization in June, despite a judge's findings last year that she acted unethically in the priest-abuse litigation against the Roman Catholic Diocese of Covington. A judge referred those allegations to the KBA last May.

The Kentucky Court of Appeals ruled in January that Fernandez, 49, breached her duty to the estate of Sanders, who died in 1996, and may have tried to conceal her $175,000 fee, which it said could warrant her suspension from practice.

Fernandez has denied wrongdoing and asked the court to reconsider its ruling. But in an interview, she said that while she regretted having to give up the bar post, she "didn't want to embarrass the LBA."

In Bonar's case, Special Judge Robert McGinnis found last year that she committed "numerous ethical violations" by settling cases for individual sex-abuse clients while she was serving as co-counsel for a group of plaintiffs in a class-action suit against the diocese.

Lawyers in class actions are generally prohibited from settling cases for individual clients because it could reduce the pool of money available to class members.

Bonar, 54, said in an interview that she disagrees with McGinnis' findings and has appealed his ruling in a related civil case. "I haven't done anything wrong," she said.

The KBA's chief counsel, Linda Gosnell, confirmed on Tuesday that its inquiry tribunal has open investigations pending of Fernandez and Bonar.

The disclosure of those investigations is allowed under a new Supreme Court rule that permits the release of information about the status of disciplinary probes if they are prompted by a court's findings in a civil matter. Investigations previously were confidential until a lawyer was found guilty.

Lawyers who are found to violate ethics rules may be privately admonished, publicly reprimanded, suspended or disbarred.

Louisville lawyer Sheryl Snyder, a former KBA president, said that by declining the top job with the Louisville bar, "Ms. Fernandez has done a commendable thing. It will be interesting to see what happens with Ms. Bonar."

Bonar's lawyer, Bill Rambicure, did not return calls this week. But in an interview last year, he said of Bonar's future role as bar leader: "You don't want to reflect poorly on the profession. But when you believe you didn't do anything wrong, you don't want to have a knee-jerk reaction and leave."

The KBA's current president, Jane Winkler Dyche, declined to comment on whether she believes it is appropriate for a president to serve while facing pending bar charges.

The KBA's duties include hearing disciplinary charges against lawyers. Its board, including its president, hears appeals of sanctions recommended by hearing officers.

Membership in the KBA, an agency of the Kentucky Supreme Court, is mandatory. The LBA, Kentucky's oldest bar association, is a voluntary group to which about 80 percent of Louisville's lawyers belong.



Lawyer who abandoned client suspended
Headline Legal News | 2008/03/11 15:56
The Supreme Court of Georgia issued the following decisions disciplining members of the State Bar:

In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 10, 2008 S08Y0168. IN THE MATTER OF ALICE CALDWELL STEWART. PER CURIAM. This disciplinary matter is before the Court pursuant to a Notice of Discipline filed by the State Bar alleging that Respondent Alice Caldwell Stewart violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.16 (d) and 9.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The maximum sanction for a single violation of Rule 1.3 is disbarment, while the maximum sanction for a single violation of Rule 1.4, 1.16 (d) or 9.3 is a public reprimand. The State Bar asserts that due to the facts of this case and Stewart's prior disciplinary record, an indefinite suspension is the appropriate sanction for her violations. We agree. According to the Notice of Discipline, Stewart accepted payment to represent a client in the appeal of a criminal conviction; she entered an appearance in that case and undertook some actions on the client's behalf, but ceased working on the case before the appeal was heard; Stewart abandoned the client and failed to keep him informed of the status of his case; she never requested that she be allowed to withdraw; she never returned case materials or any unearned fee to the client; and she failed to timely answer the properly-served Notice of Investigation regarding these allegations. Further, Stewart failed to file a Notice of Rejection despite being properly served by publication with the Notice of Discipline pursuant to Bar Rule 4-203.1 (b) (3) (ii). Therefore, she is in default, has waived her rights to an evidentiary hearing and is subject to such discipline as may be determined by this Court. See Bar Rule 4-208.1 (b). Based on our review of the record, which contains no explanation from Stewart, we find that Stewart violated Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.16 (d) and 9.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct found in Bar Rule 4-102 (d). We note in aggravation that Stewart has been twice suspended, see In the Matter of Stewart, 280 Ga. 821 (631 SE2d 106) (2006) (“Stewart I”) (two year suspension for abandonment of a client), and In the Matter of Stewart, 282 Ga. 337 (647 SE2d 53) (2007) (concurrent, indefinite suspension with conditions on reinstatement, for neglect of numerous clients) (“Stewart II”); that she accepted a letter of admonition in December 1983 regarding an incident wherein she improperly obtained access to, and reviewed, a police officer's confidential notes regarding her client and that she received a Review Panel Reprimand on October 27, 2000 for willfully, and without just cause, abandoning a client. We further take note, however, that the incidents in issue here occurred during the same period of time as the incidents which gave rise to Stewart's prior indefinite suspension and that during this time period Stewart may have been laboring under a medical impairment which the State Bar has considered in the past. Based on this fact, we accept the recommendation of the Investigative Panel and hereby impose, as discipline for Stewart's current actions, an indefinite suspension, to run concurrently with the previously-imposed suspensions. Further, we impose the same conditions on Stewart's reinstatment as were set out in Stewart II, specifically: Stewart will promptly undergo evaluation and treatment at a medical facility approved by the State Bar and its Lawyer Assistance Program; return all client files, or provide an explanation of her inability to return the materials; and return all unearned attorney fees. Prior to reinstatement, she will demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Review Panel that her medical providers have certified that she is not impaired within the meaning of Rule 4-104 and that she has met all the above requirements. Indefinite suspension with conditions. All the Justices concur, except Hunstein, P.J. and Carley, J., who dissent. S08Y0168. IN THE MATTER OF ALICE CALDWELL STEWART. HUNSTEIN, Presiding Justice, dissenting. The Investigative Panel of the State Bar found that Stewart violated Rule 1.3 (lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client and shall not wilfully abandon or disregard a legal matter entrusted to her), among several other rules set forth in the Rules of Professional Conduct. Bar Rule 4-102 (d). The maximum sanction for a single violation of Rule 1.3 is disbarment. Stewart did not timely respond to the Notice of Discipline and she is thus in default and is subject to such discipline as this Court may determine. Bar Rule 4-208.1 (b). This Court has already suspended Stewart twice, once for two years for abandonment of a client, In the Matter of Stewart, 280 Ga. 821 (631 SE2d 106) (2006), and again in the following year with a concurrent indefinite suspension for the neglect of numerous clients. In the Matter of Stewart, 282 Ga. 337 (647 SE2d 53) (2007). As the majority notes, Stewart has provided no explanation for her behavior in this case and the record is completely devoid of any mitigating factors. Given Stewart's extensive disciplinary history, I see no reason to impose yet another suspension and would instead disbar Stewart for her violation of Rule 1.3. See also Bar Rule 4-103 (finding of third disciplinary infraction shall, in and of itself, constitute grounds for disbarment). Accordingly, I respectfully dissent to the majority's imposition of an indefinite suspension in this disciplinary case. I am authorized to state that Justice Carley joins this dissent.


State Bar of Arizona to move Tucson regional office
Headline Legal News | 2008/03/07 03:13

The State Bar of Arizona is moving its southern regional office in Tucson. The new 5,300-square-foot office is at 270 N. Church Ave., next door to the Z Mansion.

The increased space will allow the office to hold meetings and educational training to better serve the 3,000 attorneys practicing in southern Arizona. The move is projected for the third quarter of this year after building renovations are complete.

The state Bar's current office at 310 S. Convent Ave. will remain open until the move.
 
Attorney Jeffrey Hursh represented the bar in the purchase of the Tucson building, with Lawyers Title Agency handling the escrow.



Minnesota Bars Beat Smoking Ban
Headline Legal News | 2008/03/07 02:50
All the world's a stage at some of Minnesota's bars. A new state ban on smoking in restaurants and other nightspots contains an exception for performers in theatrical productions. So some bars are getting around the ban by printing up playbills, encouraging customers to come in costume, and pronouncing them "actors."

The customers are playing right along, merrily puffing away — and sometimes speaking in funny accents and doing a little improvisation, too.

The state Health Department is threatening to bring the curtain down on these sham productions. But for now, it's on with the show.

At The Rock, a hard-rock and heavy-metal bar in suburban St. Paul, the "actors" during "theater night" do little more than sit around, drink, smoke and listen to the earsplitting music.

"They're playing themselves before Oct. 1. You know, before there was a smoking ban," owner Brian Bauman explained. Shaping the words in the air with his hands, like a producer envisioning the marquee, he said: "We call the production, `Before the Ban!'"

The smoking ban, passed by the Legislature last year, allows actors to light up in character during theatrical performances as long as patrons are notified in advance.

About 30 bars in Minnesota have been exploiting the loophole by staging the faux theater productions and pronouncing cigarettes props, according to an anti-smoking group.

"It's too bad they didn't put as much effort into protecting their employees from smoking," grumbled Jeanne Weigum, executive director of the Association for Nonsmokers.

The Health Department this week vowed to begin cracking down on theater nights with fines of as much as $10,000.

"The law was enacted to protect Minnesotans from the serious health effects of secondhand smoke," Minnesota Health Commissioner Sanne Magnan said. "It is time for the curtain to fall on these theatrics."

At The Rock earlier this week, a black stage curtain covered part of the entrance, and a sign next to it with an arrow read, "Stage Entrance." Along the opposite wall, below a sign saying "Props Dept.," was a stack of the only props needed: black ashtrays.

At the door was a printed playbill for that night's program, with a list of names of the people portraying bartenders and security guards. Playing the owner: "Brian."

Courtney Conk paid $1 for a button that said "Act Now" and pinned it to her shirt. That made her an actor for the night, entitling her to smoke. She turned in an understated, minimalist performance, sitting with cigarette in hand and talking to a bass player with the band.

"I thought it was funny that they found a loophole," Conk said. "I'm more of an activist-actor tonight, you could say. I think it's kind of this way of saying what we think about the ban."

While The Rock asks nothing of its actors by way of creativity, a few other bars have been a little more theatrical.

At Barnacles Resort and Campground along Lake Mille Lacs, a "traveling tobacco troupe" dressed in medieval costume on the first theater night. Mark Benjamin, a lawyer who pushed bars to exploit the loophole, wore tights, a feathered cap and black boots.

"Hey, I'm a child of the '60s. I can do a little improv," he said. His improv amounted to speaking in medieval character to other patrons.

In Hill City, Mike's Uptown owner Lisa Anderson has been offering theater night once a week. The bar had a Mardi Gras theme last Saturday, attracting about 30 patrons, most of them in costume.

"I was dressed in a Victorian dress with the old fluffy thing that weighs 500 pounds," she said. "We had some fairies and some pirates and a group of girls — I'm not sure what they were, but they had big boas and flashy makeup."

Though there were no skits, Anderson said some people "start talking with different accents." She added: "It's turned into the funnest thing I can imagine."

One bar on northern Minnesota's Iron Range, the Queen City Sports Place, calls its nightly smokefest "The Tobacco Monologues."

Proving anew there's no business like show business, Anderson said her theater-night receipts have averaged $2,000 — up from $500 right after the ban kicked in. Similarly, Bauman said revenue at The Rock dropped off 30 percent after the ban took effect, then shot back up to normal once the bar began allowing smoking again.

He and other bar owners said they plan to continue putting on theater nights.

"There's no question we were struggling," he said. "And we are extremely nervous that this is going to go away, and we will be back to the way it was."



NJ State pays $250K to settle lawsuit
Headline Legal News | 2008/03/06 03:14

The state quietly agreed to settle a little-known lawsuit that claimed Public Defender Yvonne Segars improperly fired a deputy for political reasons, three weeks before Gov. Jon S. Corzine announced plans to nominate Segars to be a Superior Court judge.

The state has agreed to pay $250,000 to former deputy public defender Christine Leone-Zwillinger, who was a supervisor in a unit that represented children who were abused and neglected, until Segars became public defender under Gov. James E. McGreevey in September 2002.

Within a month, Leone-Zwillinger, 57, of Cherry Hill, who had run for Camden County sheriff as a Republican in 1997, was fired by Segars, even though her position did not involve policy-making or require her to be of the same party as the governor, the 2004 federal suit claims.

"Upon information and belief, defendant Segars made the decision to terminate plaintiff at the request of defendant McGreevey, or those acting on his behalf, on account of plaintiff's affiliation with the Republican party and to do a "political favor' for the governor in order to make room for John (Doran), Esq., who is a Democrat," the suit says.

The suit also claims Leone-Zwillinger got an "exceptional" rating — 28 of 30 points — on her last performance review and that Doran's qualifications were "vastly inferior."

In April 2007, U.S. District Judge Freda L. Wolfson dismissed McGreevey and the Office of Public Defender from the suit, leaving Segars as the sole defendant. Court records indicate the case was settled Feb. 1 — 20 days before Corzine filed a notice of intent to nominate Segars, 52, of Ridgewood, for the Superior Court in Bergen County.

Both Segars and Doran declined comment through a spokesman, who referred all questions to Corzine's office, which citing confidentiality reasons refused to say whether Segars disclosed the matter on her nomination questionnaire or whether she was deemed qualified by a panel of the New Jersey State Bar Association.

The chairman of that review panel, Ralph J. Lamparello, said the committee cannot discuss its confidential reviews of potential judges and prosecutors. Even members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which must approve appointments, don't learn whether a candidate is deemed qualified unless the bar association chooses to testify against a candidate a governor nominated despite being deemed unfit by the bar association.

Corzine spokesman Jim Gardner said the administration was aware of the lawsuit but unconcerned about it.

"The office is well aware of this legal matter because it is a matter of public record and is being handled by (the Department of) Law and Public Safety," Gardner said.

Asked why the state would settle the suit as it neared trial after more than three years in litigation, David Wald, a spokesman for the Department of Law and Public Safety, said "We thought this was a fair and reasonable settlement."

Chris Farella, the state-paid private lawyer retained to represent Segars, did not return calls for comment. The state has paid his firm $31,301 to defend the suit in 2005 and 2006. The Office of the Attorney General could not provide cost figures for 2004 and for 2007 through the present.

Richard M. Schall, Leone-Zwillinger's lawyer, declined comment until the settlement is signed, which he expected to happen in a week.



[PREV] [1] ..[56][57][58][59][60][61] [NEXT]
All
Headline Legal News
Legal Topics
Legal Business
Attorney News
Court News
Court Watch
Areas of Focus
Legal Interview
Opinions
DC-area sniper shootings case to ..
Supreme Court to consider Louisia..
Veterans court may be collateral ..
Justices spurn Georgia inmate, de..
Court to rule on Newtown shooting..
Detained Saudi women's rights act..
Ohio Republicans defending state ..
Case about indigent drivers and d..
Court rejects Ghosn’s request to..
Demonstrators gather for Heathrow..
Court: $700M judgment against Nor..
N Carolina court: State retirees ..
Oregon's high court: Developers c..
Court upholds car rental tax impo..
High court deciding fate of cross..
Court records reveal a Mueller re..
Florida school shooting suspect d..
French court hits Swiss bank UBS ..
Court: Constitutional ban on high..
High court rules for retired US m..




Santa Ana Workers' Compensation Lawyers
www.davidgentrylaw.com
Chicago Truck Drivers Lawyer
Chicago Workers' Comp Attorneys
www.krol-law.com
Bar Association Website Design
Bar Association Member Management
www.lawpromo.com
Indianapolis, IN Personal Injury Law Firm
Indian Personal Injury Attorneys
www.rwp-law.com
Downtown Manhattan Business Law Attorneys
Breach of Contract Lawyers
www.woodslaw.com
San Francisco Trademark Lawyer
San Francisco Copyright Lawyer
www.onulawfirm.com
Lorain Elyria Divorce Lawyer
www.loraindivorceattorney.com
Chicago Business Law Attorney
Corporate Litigation Attorneys
www.rothlawgroup.com
Surry County Criminal Defense Lawyers
Yadkin County Family Law Attorneys
www.dirussolaw.com
Connecticut Special Education Lawyer
www.fortelawgroup.com
Law Firm Web Design Templates
Lawyer Website Templates
www.webpromo.com
   Legal Resource
Headline Legal News for You to Reach America's Best Legal Professionals. The latest legal news and information - Law Firm, Lawyer and Legal Professional news in the Media.
 
 
 
Copyright © ClickTheLaw.com. All Rights Reserved. Legal Marketing Blog. The content contained on the web site has been prepared by Click The Law. as a service to the internet community and is not intended to constitute legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance. By using the www.clickthelaw.com you agree to be bound by these Terms & Conditions.

Affordable Legal Web Designby Law Promo