The National Law Journal
January 31, 2013
1. June 25, 2013 06:46 PM
Probate in California too is rife with cronyism, carelessness and gross disregard of the rights of those intended to be protected. Critics of the pattern of "go along to get along" get their fee applications ravaged, and everything they do becomes much more difficult. It's a closed system that protects itself.
2. March 27, 2013 08:03 AM
Except that the respondent is (and anyone should realize that she is) biased in this case, having some problems because of representing a family member, this article does not give us enough specific facts to judge the validity or legitimacy, vel non, of the Bar's complaint against this attorney blogger. Please give us more info and keep us advised as this unfolds.
Probate is one of those fields that have, at many times and in many places, been rife with cronyism, carelessness and gross disregard of the rights of those intended to be protected, and corruption. I ran into some horrifying examples of this early in my practice years ago. Of course, some things in probate law contributed to the problems. Some have been improved in the ensuing years, but abuses are still rampant in many places.
The legal profession's rules for its lawyer members have not always comported and still do not comport with the Constitutional protections afforded jpoliticians, child molesters, etc. Attorneys are often the only ones who know about dishonest or unethical, or otherwise bad, judges and justices , attorneys, including State Bar lawyers, etc., or the legal system, much of which they learn the hard way in cases in which they and their clients do have an interest and potential bias, and it is simply too dangerous for an attorney to tell the truth about them, from personal and professional experience, much less repeat what another judge, another attorney or attorneys, or other credible person tells you, even with partial corroboration. Others, with the right political and sexual relationships, can openly issue press releases and hire PR firms to influence public opinion in pending cases and it's accepted. Attorneys with proven personal knowledge of certain shocking material facts have told me but told me they were too afraid of retaliation by named judges and the Bar to repeat them privately to State Bar and other government lawyers, etc, much less provide affidavits or testimony.
As for "bringing" either the State Bar or the legal profession into disrepute, both most State Bars and too many in the legal profession have done a very good job of that without the aid of this blog. I wish I could repeat what a young lawyer who now holds high judicial office told me about the State Bar and its disciplinary process and personnel, which I didn't believe at the time for reasons I would also love to explain publicly, or what a recent past President of the State Bar told me about the profession and too many of its members, years ago, much less now, but the Bar's rules forbit it and they would probably both deny it. As for the legal system, I've represented too many survivors of incestuous child sexual abuwe, some of it at the hands of people who were elected and high appionted officials then or later, disrepute doesn't begin to capture the facts and opinions of such matters, in which most of the perpetrators are not on the sex offender list becuase they were never investigated, prosecuted, etc. and it was covered up.
3. February 28, 2013 07:47 AM
> might have suffered from dementia> This statement is made four and a half years after the notarization and a three and a half years after the first documents were filed in the underlying case. In other words, the ARDC has the right ex post facto to declare incompetency with absolutely no timely competent psychiatric evidence. On these grounds, no attorney should ever notarize a document!
The blog contains the court documents and laws, Supreme Court (IL and US) involved in this case.
4. February 28, 2013 07:26 AM
You selected one of the many key features of this case .
5. February 04, 2013 07:35 AM
So what else is new. We have a corrupt probate racketeering practice in Passaic County, NJ Superior Court Chancery Division. Just ask anyone who's had wealthy parents go through the Chancery Court there. There are a group of attorneys, along with the Judge, who are acting in concert with each other to strip the assets of the estate by taking power of attorney over the parent and then wiping out the proceeds. I've talked to people that saw the attorneys take over $500,000 in "legal fees" in under 6 months.
The probate stories coming out of Passaic County remind me of the days of Gov. Christine Whitman who was told during her second campaign to stay away from Passaic County, or the "dirt might rub off".