- Quickdraw McLaw
- 41 Comments
- 344 Views
Almost without fail, anytime we post a story about an attorney being investigated or facing a complaint from the State Bar, someone will comment about how the Office of Bar Counsel is going about it wrong or prioritizing the wrong thing or not seeking the right amount of punishment. The State Bar website says
The Office of Bar Counsel protects the public by educating and assisting lawyers to practice ethically and competently. Through its Boards, the office will discipline those lawyers who are found to have violated the Rules of Professional Conduct. All investigations of possible attorney misconduct are conducted through the Office of Bar Counsel. In matters that warrant disciplinary action, bar counsel then prosecutes all disciplinary proceedings.
Do you think the OBC is running afoul of this statement? If you were Bar Counsel, what would you do differently? What types of issues would you prioritize? Is there something they shouldn’t be doing? Is there anyway they can do this job without constantly being framed as incompetent villains?
How does it help the public to investigate someone who made a comment? Whether you agree with the comment or not, free speech is somewhat of a BFD in this country. Also, OBC won't even give preliminary opinions or help with ethics questions anymore. I can read the rules myself, but when I call them, all they do is recite the rules. What are we paying for? They are not educating or assisting us. We went to law school. We can read. We do not need them to read the rules to us. I think they are incompetent bullies.
I can remember a few times in the early 2,000's speaking with Rob Bare himself with ethics questions. He was always helpful, accessible and logical. He was just as good as D Ct Judge. He is missed.
I think they are concerned about it undermining the credibility of the judiciary, but it's hard to see how that outweighs free speech. Fumo stated it as his opinion. Someone who is running for office has certain ethical obligations, but discussing your opponent or future opponent is a fine line. I think free speech has to win out in this case. Far worse things have been said about judges at all levels in Nevada. this makes is seem like someone has a vendetta.
Agree w 10:09 – Rob Bare is missed. He did a great job over there and was almost universally respected as a D Ct judge. Also agree w 10:36 in that this does seem like a vendetta. If anything, all this does is undermine our confidence even further (if that's possible) that OBC is actually doing anything productive.
I wish Rob Bare was still on the bench. He should have his name legally changed to Roberta and run again.
Rob Bare is doing a great job as a retained expert in the areas of professional responsibility and ethics (mostly legal malpractice cases). He is also representing attorneys in disciplinary cases at the State Bar. It seems like he has found a good home. I've heard really good things about all this. Also, I know he has somewhat recently teamed up with prior bar lawyer Glenn Machado and they work together now. I'm saying the following for a friend: You can still call him, just like the old days, and receive guidance regarding your ethical quandary. Ha.
With Bill passed, and Rob in private practice, he will be my first call should the need arise.
As a general rule, the OBC only acts on complaints, someone likely complained.
Doubt it. They've become more activist the last several years and really overstepping their jurisdiction so I'm pretty sure they're taking this up on their own initiative. If there was an actual complaint, it'd probably be part of the publicly available filings as an exhibit.
TTHHWWWAAACCKK!!!
What 10:00 said. Also, timing can be critical and create suspicion of how matters are politically motivated. Fumo's comment was way back in October, and they wait until after the June Primary to file against him, when it became clear that he lost to Wolfson. Seems like as long as there was a chance he could be the next D.A., they were not going to pursue him.
They had over 8 months after the comment to file a complaint, but don't do so until very shortly after he lost the June election.
They can't claim they needed preparation and research time. What is there to prepare? There is one sentence of material to review–his remark, and they then simply have to decide whether they believe that violates ethical rules.
Other take: maybe they didn't want to be perceived as meddling in an election either, given that Wolfson attacked him for it. I can see it the other way too. I'm not sure its as clear cut as you think. The FBI is known to not target political candidates in most cases for that reason, at least until the election is over.
And Fumo has Dominic Gentile, who is the master of such matters, and has won a case(s) before the U.S. Supreme Court against our State Bar when the Bar pursued attorneys over public statements. One that comes to mind is that defense counsel made some limited public statement after the D.A.'s office had already heavily disparaged the defendant before the press corp. Gentile won a landmark decision on that one.
One of the few living lawyers to have been a party – not counsel – in a SCOTUS case.
I hope Gentile crushes bar counsel (again).
Fumo has to pay Gentile's bills. His hourly rate has to be pretty high. Unsure how this will end up. Fumo's comments are arguably false and clearly disparaging.
Fumo already suffered consequences. After mid-2021, accusing a Romneyesque guy like Doug Herndon of a being a “white supremacist” strikes even centrist Democrats as the kind of Woke CRT-ish bullshit that most people are sick of. By 2022, when Progressive district attorneys and mayors were being voted out of office in America’s bluest cities, that rhetoric could only kill Fumo’s electoral prospects for DA in purple Clark County.
Fumo is done. He certainly won’t be elected to anything statewide.
That's actually a solid analysis. Fumo esta FUBAR.
If I never see a "Vote for Fuomo" sign again, I'll die a happy man.
Doug Herndon sent an innocent man to prison for decades. I care about his hurt feelings? White supremacist was pretty mild.
I think 11:25's point was that Fumo's insult was a self-own, politically speaking.
'Vote Fumo, CRT-Indoctrinated Woke Progressive for chief prosecutor.'
If that bombs in San Francisco and Manhattan, you think it'll work in Vegas? Good luck with that
Fumo is the worst. With that being said, I don't know if this necessarily warrants a bar complaint. But I am beyond happy that this ridiculous statement is being broadcast. Let the County see how simply existing as a white male will constitute "white supremacy" in these people's minds.
My reading of the bar complaint is that Fumo
1) Expressed an opinion that Herndon was a white supremacist, and
2) Made a false statement, at a law school discussion, that Ballou was "kicked out of the courtroom"
1) Opinion. Free speech. Shouldn't be disciplined.
2) Arguably a false statement. And if such a horrific, terrible, bold-faced LIE is subject to OBC discipline, there's gonna be a bunch of other lawyers disciplined too, right? right?
You have asked a legitimate question so here is my earnest answer. When Bare ran the office, it was respected as being fair and consistent. Rob moved to the the District Court, and David Clark took over. OBC was considered fair but was also falling behind slightly and had a backlog. David was treated very harshly by the Nevada Supreme Court (specifically the one justice who is rightfully villified on this board regularly) who leaned on the Bar to boot him out. Prior to his ouster, the bar was pretty well known to have a uniformity of approach to ethics and discipline. That was the end of ANY semblance of normalcy.
Before Clark was pushed out but while the tea leaves were developing, OBC brought in Brian Kunzi to look over Clark's shoulder and be the heir apparent since Kunzi had just left as district attorney of Nye County and NSC/OBC wanted someone prosecutorial and tough. Kunzi lasted in the job merely a short time before he pushed out and made Director of Admissions so that they chair could be emptied for Stan Hunterton. The appointment of Stan was the worst thing that ever happened to OBC and has destroyed the office. Stan destroyed uniformity of discipline. Stan made the office draconian and hated. Stan started tactics from bar investigators/paralegals that are outright dishonest and unethical themselves (but who the watchdogs?). This is the reason that since Stan's appointment the OBC has been a revolving door of incompetence, ineptitude and insidiousness.
As far as the Fumo Complaint, it is petty stuff when we as practictioners watch truly bad guys go untouched. Those names are well known to this blog and are a blight on our profession. Small firms get teed up because they are easy targets; big firms are just expected to police themselves because they are too big of targets to go after.
One of the things that David Clark, did, however, was I think really cheap. Every time an attorney received a DUI charge (or was it only if they were convicted?), he would file an ethics complaint and try to get the attorney in trouble for violating ethical rules. This was true EVEN if the attorney had a DUI with no property damage, no one injured – basically the "garden variety" DUI or "base level" DUI.
And the Nevada Supreme Court, without deviation, would respond with the same response each and every time he did this, which was dozens of times, that a base level, first time DUI was not going to be sanctioned. You'd think after the first few that he would have got a clue, but no, he continued to try to burn any attorney on the receiving end of a DUI.
It was not about having a clue on the disciplinary side; it had to do with the fact SCR 111 stated that OBC had a duty to file the case for DUI. The Nevada Supreme Court did rule over and over that DUI was not subject to summary suspension. However SCR 111 did not get amended to address this discrepancy until 2018. Clark applied the rule as written; the NSC stated that it would not enforce the rule as written but also failed to revise the rule.
I 100% agree that Stan Hunterton destroyed whatever was left of respect within the OBC. I had OBC sniff around me once over some petty complaint and got Bill Terry (RIP) to get them to back off. Without Bill I am sure I would have some reprimand on my record over some BS.
Phil Patee was tolerable. Not sure if he is still there. OBC makes our Nevada Supreme Court look good. Two jokes
At least Patee was fair. He went back to the Rob Bare days.
This thread is fact based and not bs. #Twackmesometruth
Valid comments are being removed for no reason.
Such as? I have been following this thread all day and have not seen anything come down.
Yesterday. Someone posted about losing respect for Herndon and the speech is protected was taken down.
Setting aside Fumo and the history of bar counsel, let me ask a question. When is the last time you saw disciplinary action against anyone in a large firm. The yoke seems to fall heavily only on small firms and solo practioners.
Large firms, for the most part, have checks and balances in place. Especially when it comes to accounting, which seems to be a large portion of disciplinary actions. That said, have you personally witnessed ethical violations by a large-firm attorney and, if so, what? Just curious because I see the same complaint over and over without any details about what the fictitious big firm attorney has done that goes without punishment.
Mostly unethical abuse of process that is not worth the trouble of reporting or cannot be totally knowable to an opposing counsel. Let’s say, hypothetically, something like depositing the funds of a judgment debtor in their trust account to prevent it from being collected by the creditor, just hypothetically speaking, and holding it long enough that when the debtor files bk that money can’t be treated as a fraudulent conveyance.
5:44 if you are staying that as a reason why large firms don’t get as many bar complaints or investigations – aren’t most complaints filed by clients who think their case was botched, they are unhappy about fees, or they think their money was stolen? Primary source of bar complaints is clients.
Didn't very recently the Nevada Supreme Court refer a prosecutor or some prosecutors to the state bar because of improper statements to a jury during a trial that resulted in a couple of convictions being overturned?
Also, wasn't there a prosecutor having an ex parte meeting with a judge in chambers to quash a warrant for one of the key witnesses that resulted in the defendant being released immediately without having to register as a sex offender?
Does anyone remember who the prosecutors are? Was there ever a response from the state bar for their conduct?
And this is exactly why they have lost all credibility. They publicly announce that they are investigating Fumo, apparently without prompting, for statements he made that he prefaced with “I believe”
Meanwhile, prosecutors that the Nevada Supreme Court actually found committed misconduct in actual trials with real world consequences are not even getting a slap on the wrist.
Fumo’s statements were dumb, and he shouldn’t have said them. But they were statements made outside the courtroom, outside the courthouse, and were not within the scope of his legal duties. This is dangerous 1A territory.
Are they going after anyone making rude accusations? Then Danielle Chio’s incendiary mailers against Judge Bonaventure certainly qualify her for an investigation too. And I’m quite sure I’ve heard some attorneys say unflattering things about their colleagues on the courthouse steps. Perhaps they should all start being investigated for every mean word?
OBC is not supposed to be the speech police, they are supposed to go after real misconduct. We should all be concerned with how blatantly political this investigation looks.
These are public figures. Freedom of speech. What is the violation,????
Side Question: I have negotiated a speeding ticket for my son through the Las Vegas Justice Court Online Case Resolution site (which is pretty cool), except that it will not bring up the window when I click "Show Payment Window." I have disabled all pop up blockers, etc, and even tried from different browsers (Chrome, Safari, and Edge) but it still will not bring up the payment window. Anyone have any ideas?