Attorney Sanctioned for Web-Post. Ethic or Free Speech Violation?

In New Y0rk, an attorney was suspended for five years for committing a number of ethical violations. While there is no reason to defend the attorney’s misrepresentations or his trust account problems – what many consider troubling about the NY suspension is that the attorney was seemingly sanctioned for things he said about a judge on a web post.

A post on the Legal Profession Blog provides some revealing excerpts of the attorney’s web post. Further, it also has this quote from the sanctioning judge, concerning the web post:

Irrespective of the respondent’s sincerity in his beliefs, his overzealous behavior which took the form of disparaging remarks on the court, false accusations about Judge Amodeo disseminated in a public forum as part of a campaign to pressure the court into changing its rulings, and noncompliance with multiple court orders, truly constituted conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

While the attorney’s non-speech behavior may have qualified him for sanctions, its unfortunate that the NY Court even contemplates this web post criticizing a judge in determining whether to suspend a person from the practice of law.

Are courts and bar associations using ethical violations to control attorney speech?

This entry was posted in Speech Restrictions by Bars and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Attorney Sanctioned for Web-Post. Ethic or Free Speech Violation?

  1. Glenn's Cult? says:

    This whole case has stunk from the beginning. Genia was thrown in jail when she was 7 months pregnant, the father was allowed to move away and more agregious behavior was allowed to be perpetrated. We in the general public will never know the whole truth and as I saw on the Law blog where this blog was linked, I saw a poster make a comment about the truth. That poster is so correct.

    As a battered mother myself, I know all to well how the courts treat abused and battered women in court. I was in fact told that since I knew my husband was abusive before I got pregnant, therw as now a child so I now need to deal with whatever abuse my ex husband chooses to give me. In other words, I made my bed, now I have to lie on it. These autracities are happening all over the United States. The courts are not the only guilty players. This goes across the board with police dpeartments, psychiatrists, pscychologists and GALs (children’s attorney) being guilty of the same bias.

    Another example:

    GAL questions a child in this manner:

    GAL: Was there fighting or yelling in your hosue?
    Child: Yes my daddy always yells at mommy and daddy hits mommy.
    GAL: Daddy hits mommy? Does mommy hit daddy?
    Child: No only my daddy hits.
    GAL: What does mommy do?
    Child: She tries to stop him from hitting.
    GAL: How does mommy stop daddy from hitting?
    Child: She runs, hides, holds her arms up.
    GAL: Does mommy hit daddy while he is hitting her?
    Child: No, I told you only my daddy hits (starts crying).

    GAL conclusion?

    Mommy talks to child too much about alleged father violence so therefore mommy should not ahve custody.

    When society is destroyed as a result of men wanting to criminalize motherhood, and our children are criminals, insane, institutionalized, or worse; we will start to see the rror of our ways. But by then there will be no women to be “mothers”, the pillar of any family.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>