FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Ethics & PR

Lal v. State of Cal.

Fri, 25 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Criminal Law & Procedure, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Injury And Tort Law) In an action against the California Highway Patrol and certain officers for the shooting death of plaintiff's husband, dismissal of the action with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute when her attorney failed to meet deadlines and attend hearings is reversed where an attorney's gross negligence constituted an extraordinary circumstance warranting relief from a judgment dismissing the case for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b).

Florida Bar v. Ratiner

Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(Fla., Ethics & Disciplinary Code, Ethics & Professional Responsibility) In Florida Bar's complaint against an attorney in connection to his alleged misconduct during the deposition of a representative of DuPont, referee's findings of fact and recommendations as to guilt are affirmed, as well as the mitigating factors and the aggravating factors found by the referee, but the referee's alternative recommendations of disbarment or a two-year suspension with respect to discipline are disapproved, and instead a public reprimand and a suspension of sixty days followed by two years' probation is imposed.

Jay E. Hayden Found. v. First Neighbor Bank, NA

Tue, 22 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Banking Law, Civil Procedure, Criminal Law & Procedure, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Injury And Tort Law, Probate, Trusts & Estates) In a RICO suit against a bank, two law firms, and affiliated individuals, grant of defendants' motion to dismiss on the ground that the complaint itself showed that plaintiffs had missed the four-year deadline governing RICO suits is affirmed as, by the summer of 2003 at the latest, the plaintiffs knew that a lawyer had looted the estate and that bank's employees were trying to prevent further investigation of the lawyer.

Real Estate Bar Ass'n for Massachusetts, Inc. v. Nat'l Real Estate Info. Serv.

Mon, 21 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Consumer Protection Law, Ethics & Disciplinary Code, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Property Law & Real Estate) In the Real Estate Bar Association's suit against defendant for unauthorized practice of law, judgment of the district court is vacated in part, reversed in part and remanded where: 1) district court's judgment against plaintiff on its unauthorized practice of law claim is vacated as in Massachusetts, the state judicial branch and the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts (SJC) in particular, is solely responsible for defining what is the practice of law, and here, there is no controlling precedent which addresses whether the activities at issue constitute unauthorized practice of law; and 2) district court's judgment on defendant's dormant Commerce Clause counterclaim is reversed as plaintiff is not a state actor, defendant has not stated a dormant Commerce Clause claim against plaintiff, and plaintiff's bringing of its suit against defendant under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 221, section 46B is protected by the First Amendment.

US v. 777 Greene Ave.

Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:00:05 PDT

(U.S. 2d Cir., Asset Forfeiture, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law & Procedure, Ethics & Professional Responsibility) In a civil forfeiture proceeding, the motion to withdraw of defendant's counsel is denied where such a motion will not be granted unless counsel satisfies the requirements established under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1976), and its progeny. With regard to motions to withdraw filed by appellate counsel appointed pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 983(b)(2)(A), the procedure established under Anders and its progeny is best suited to protect the right to counsel to which indigent litigants are entitled.

Harrell v. Fla. Bar

Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 11th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Constitutional Law, Ethics & Disciplinary Code, Ethics & Professional Responsibility) In a First Amendment action by a lawyer who advertised the services of his firm extensively, claiming in a broad facial challenge that nine advertising-related provisions of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar were so vague as to violate his due process rights, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part where plaintiff did not give any substantial reason to believe that submitting a bare script or outline of the advertisements he proposed would constitute a hardship. However, the judgment is reversed in part where: 1) plaintiff satisfied the injury-in-fact requirement with respect to five of the challenged rules; 2) plaintiff made an adequate threshold showing of vagueness in the application of the rules to his proposed advertisements; and 3) the bar did not bear its heavy burden of showing that it is "absolutely clear that the allegedly wrongful behavior could not reasonably be expected to recur."

Siefert v. Alexander

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 7th Cir., Constitutional Law, Elections, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Government Law) In a judge's action for declaratory and injunctive relief against members of the Wisconsin Judicial Commission, challenging under the First Amendment certain judicial ethical rules, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed in part where the partisan affiliation ban at issue impermissibly acted to prohibit plaintiff's speech on both his political views and his qualifications for office. However, the judgment is reversed in part where, unlike restrictions designed, for example, to regulate federal employees' political activity, restrictions on judicial speech may, in some circumstances, be required by the Due Process Clause, and the solicitation ban was drawn closely enough to the state's interest in preserving impartiality and preventing corruption to be constitutional.

Mee Indus. v. Dow Chem. Co.

Tue, 15 Jun 2010 20:00:01 PDT

(U.S. 11th Cir., Civil Procedure, Commercial Law, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Evidence, Intellectual Property, Manufacturing, Patent, Remedies) In a malicious prosecution suit based on an underlying, allegedly meritless patent infringement action, partial judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where: 1) sufficient evidence supported the jury's conclusions that Dow filed the patent infringement suit without the requisite probable cause and did not rely in good faith on the advice of counsel; 2) the evidence was not sufficient to meet the clear and convincing standard required for an award of punitive damages; and 3) the district court did not err in excluding plaintiff's loss of goodwill theory of damages.

Florida Bar v. Hines

Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(Fla., Ethics & Disciplinary Code, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Property Law & Real Estate) In the Florida Bar's complaint against an attorney, arising from events in the course of acting as attorney and closing agent in a real estate transaction, the matter is remanded to the referee for a recommendation as to the appropriate discipline as the attorney violated Florida Bar 4-5.3(b) by allowing a nonlawyer, whom she neither employed, supervised, nor controlled, to have signatory authority over an escrow account she opened to handle real estate closings, resulting in misappropriation by that nonlawyer of funds held in trust in the escrow account.

Florida Bar v. Scott

Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(Fla., Ethics & Disciplinary Code, Ethics & Professional Responsibility) In Florida Bar's complaint against an attorney, arising from the attorney's representation of a client-firm against the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, a referee's report recommending the attorney be guilty of professional misconduct and suspended from the practice of law for eighteen months is affirmed in part and vacated in part where: 1) the referee's findings more than amply support the recommendations of guilt as to the conflict-of-interest claims as well as to claims of misrepresentation; and 2) referee's sanction recommendation is vacated and instead a three-year suspension is imposed.

Lagstein v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's

Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Contracts, Dispute Resolution & Arbitration, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Health Law, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law) In plaintiff's appeal from the district court's court vacating an arbitral award on the ground of its excessive size and vacating a punitive damages award on the additional ground that the arbitration panel lacked jurisdiction to enter it after the panel had entered its compensatory award, the order is reversed where: 1) the district court erred in concluding that the size of the arbitration awards demonstrated manifest disregard of the law; 2) the fact that the majority of the arbitrators may have made a mistake in citing a benefit that plaintiff had not purchased did not establish irrationality of its ultimate conclusion that defendant breached its contract; 3) nothing in plaintiff's policy expressly withdrew determination of procedural issues from the panel; and 4) defendant failed to demonstrate either evident partiality or evident corruption in the arbitrators.

People v. McLean

Thu, 10 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(N.Y., Criminal Law & Procedure, Ethics & Professional Responsibility) In a murder prosecution, the appellate division's order declining to consider defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim is affirmed where the lack of an adequate record barred review on direct appeal not only where vital evidence was plainly absent, as in Kinchen, but wherever the record fell short of establishing conclusively the merit of the defendant's claim.

Anaya-Burgos v. Lasalvia-Prisco

Wed, 9 Jun 2010 20:00:02 PDT

(U.S. 1st Cir., Drugs & Biotech, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Evidence, Health Law, Injury And Tort Law, Professional Malpractice) In plaintiff's suit against an oncologist and others, claiming that the death of his wife was the result of defendants' negligent acts and omissions that induced her to purchase their "cancer vaccine" treatment and forego conventional cancer treatments, a grant of defendants' motion for judgment as a matter of law is vacated and remanded as, plaintiff put forth sufficient evidence including expert testimony, from which a reasonable jury could have concluded - and did conclude - that defendants' breach of the standard of care towards the wife caused her untimely death by inducing her to choose their treatment with promises that it would cure her.

Yost v. Stout

Tue, 8 Jun 2010 20:00:04 PDT

(U.S. 10th Cir., Civil Procedure, Civil Rights, Elections, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Government Law) In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 challenge to the "endorsement clause" of the Kansas Code of Judicial Conduct that generally prohibits a judge or judicial candidate from publicly endorsing or opposing another candidate for public office, plaintiff's appeal from summary judgment for defendants is dismissed where the notice of appeal was untimely.

Lahiri v. Universal Music & Video Dist. Corp.

Mon, 7 Jun 2010 20:00:04 PDT

(U.S. 9th Cir., Civil Procedure, Copyright, Entertainment Law, Ethics & Professional Responsibility, Intellectual Property, International Law, Sanctions) In plaintiff's counsel's appeal from an order by the district court sanctioning him for his five-year bad faith pursuit of a frivolous copyright infringement claim, the order is affirmed where: 1) had counsel, a self-described experienced copyright lawyer, made even a cursory investigation into the circumstances of plaintiff's 21-year old composition, he would have known plaintiff had no copyright interest in music he composed for hire; 2) counsel's repeated misrepresentations of Indian copyright law clearly evidenced his recklessness and bad faith; and 3) the district court carefully excluded inadequately documented costs, as well as taxable costs not included in defendants' bill of costs.