Daily Dose (6/17/05)
Can it be that Long Island has more than its share of crooked lawyers? If you have a good explanation, please leave a comment below. . . . . Former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt has joined the law firm DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary. . . . . Ed Fagan, who brought the first claims against Swiss banks for profiting from the accounts of Holocaust victims and refugees, is fighting to keep his law license. . . . . A New Hampshire lawyer faces suspension or disbarment for taking an elderly client's beachfront cottage as payment for what were held to be clearly excessive legal fees. . . . . According to this story from South Africa, the Director General of the Justice Department wants two-thirds of South Africa's judges and magistrate to be black. . . . . Some lawyers are tough as nails, but I'm struggling for the appropriate cliche for this lawyer, Maridee Costanzo, who pled guilty to trying to hire a hit man to kill her estranged husband. She reportedly may have mental health issues. When asked by the judge is she knew that she had a right to a jury trial, she replied, "Been there. Done that. Understand thoroughly."
About Long Island lawyers: In April 2004, Timothy J. O'Sullivan, the executive director of the State's Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection, explained why he believed there was a disproportionate amount of money stolen from client real estate, trust and estate funds by lawyers practicing within NY's Second Department (Nassau and Suffolk Counties). According to John Caher's New York Lawyer/NYLJ article (04-13-04):
"Mr. O'Sullivan attributed the imbalance to the real estate escrow problem, the size of the Second Department and the fact that it has many solo practitioners, who are more likely to steal. Agency records show that most thefts are carried out by middle-aged male attorneys working alone. Alcohol or drug abuse is often at the root of the misconduct, according to the fund."
You need to be a registered subscriber to see the NYLJ article. My discussion at ethicalEsq is here -- http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ethicalesq/2004/04/14#a1224 .
It seems quite logical that solos are far more tempted to dip into escrow funds when they face a financial or personal crisis (or are just feeling greedy): it is not as likely that there is another pair of eyes monitoring the situation closely (or with the authority to put a stop to it).
Posted by: David Giacalone | June 17, 2005 at 11:27 AM
David: Thanks for that. So it's a demographics type thing, which makes sense.
Posted by: John Steele | June 17, 2005 at 02:41 PM