In Matter Of Castelli: Legal Case Study

Legal research is not only about discovering how the law applies, it is also about determining how strong case is. Using legal research we are analyzing strength and weaknesses of client’s case, and using counteranalysis we determine how opponent can use weaknesses against us. In this paper we will establish why counteranalysis is important and why do we use it, when we use it and where we can apply it.

ABA 5.3 (A)(B)(C). – Attorney Howe did not make reasonable efforts to supervise his paralegal. Mr. Howe knew that Carl was inexperienced in the firm as a “new-hire and should have practiced due diligence in his supervisorial duties. Attorney Howe failed to give clear guidelines and did not take immediate

1.16 (A).1, 5.5(B) - Upon learning that Carl had taken on a case on his own, which is an example of unauthorized practice of law, Attorney Howe should have notified the clients that Carl did not have such authority to take on a case, set discounted fees or conduct an interview without Attorney Howe’s supervision, thus in good consciousness Attorney Howe cannot take on clients under fraudulent circumstances.

(2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;

Equally important is to hire an attorney that is within the ethical boundaries of the profession. With such high consequences' at stake, defendants can not afford to give their cases to lawyers that have spotty ethical records or malpractice marks in their background. Unethical attorneys can result in severe setbacks for the accused. Even if the defunct attorney is successfully removed, time and strategies have already been

Lohman v. Superior Court (1978) 81 Cal. App. 3d 90 [146 Cal. Rptr. 171]the pro se’ litigant enforced his rights not as a client but rather as the person functioning as an attorney. Ultimately,

On April 14, 2015, Brian F. Guillot, Esq., of Metairie Louisiana, submitted a complaint to Office of the Bar Counsel regarding Ernest A. Solomon. Guillot asserts that Solomon failed to comply with Guillot’s request for accounting in reference to the estate of Elmore C. Desvigne, Sr. Solomon has allegedly violated Mass.R.Prof.C 1.15(c) and (d).

the attorney had learned this information in the course of representing a client in an

Frances E. Sokoll filed a complaint against Attorney Jeffrey Feuer on October 21, 2014. Sokoll alleges that Feuer did not return her calls regarding the status of her case, and as a result she requested that he return her file and check. When Feuer did not do so, Sokoll filed a complaint with this office; Feuer has allegedly violated Mass.R.Prof.C. 1.2, 1.3, 1.4(a), 1.16(d).

Jacquelyn Young hired the law firm of Becker & Poliakoff to represent her in her federal employment discrimination lawsuit against her employer. The firm associate that filed the action made a mistake by attaching the wrong U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) right-to-sue letter. The court dismissed the claims. The law firm did not try to re-file using the correct attachment, or try to dismiss the motion. Thirteen months later, the law firm informed Young that the claims had been dismissed, and that the firm was withdrawing from representing her further with the case.

Even if a nonlawyer does not hold themselves out as an attorney, they still engage in UPL when they go beyond copying information in writing from clients for non-approved forms, or go beyond eliciting factual information to assist in completing approved forms, and give advice or otherwise assist in completing forms that clients rely on. Brumbaugh, 355 So. 2d at 1193-94; Catarcio, 709 So.2d at 100. In Brumbaugh, the nonlawyer was never a member of the Florida Bar, nor did she hold herself out as an attorney. Id. at 1193. She advertised her secretarial services for “Do-It-Yourself” type forms. Id. at 1189. The nonlawyer typed up the forms she deemed necessary for the proceedings, gave detailed instructions and advice on witness testimony, remedies,

The $15 million wrongful termination lawsuit (Oehler v. The State Bar of California et al., case number BC610699, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles) that hit the State Bar of California echoes allegations made by the bar’s former executive director pointing towards rampant ethical violations. Plaintiff Sonja Oehler’s LinkedIn profile lists her previous title as the bar’s former administrative specialist. Rather than being let go from her position for a lack of ability or dedication to the job or a necessary reduction in staff, Oehler alleges that she was fired from her job because she knew too much about rampant ethical violations: deceit, deception, incompetence and falsification of issues on the part

The court also found the defendant to be in violation of handling a legal matter without preparation adequate in the circumstances, by allowing a non-lawyer to prepare a contract of sale on his behalf. The appellate court imposed a three-month suspension on the defendant. In the case of Attorney James Johnson, early on the morning of the closing, his paralegal Susan sent the original closing documents to Mr. Johnson, who signed them and sent them back to Susan before noon that day. Unlike in the Matter v. Parker, 241 A.D.2d 208, 670 N.Y.S.2d 414, James Johnson did not fail to supervise his paralegal or allowed her to prepare the contract on his behalf. Mr. Johnson signed the document himself and sent them back the very same day which implies a care of duty on his part. The paralegal conducted the closing making sure all documents were signed and settled. She did not represent the client in court or attained the role of a

When it comes to large sums of money, it is not uncommon for the spender to feel they have been ripped off or become over protected. The practice of law is no exception to this phenomenon, and crocked lawyers and paralegals have negatively contributed to the notion. On several occasions law professionals have taken client money for personal use, acting against the law and rules of professional conduct. Although lawyers and paralegals have their own individual rules and guidelines to abide by, they follow the same professional structure of proper conduct. The rules of conduct for paralegals is governed by the Law Society of Upper Canada and is the governing body responsible for reports of misconduct. Further investigations will lay out the proper procedures and tasks that must be completed when a paralegal encounters an accusations of misconduct, specifically when a client accuses a paralegal of misappropriating money from the clients trust fund. When it comes to possible options it is important to remember that by proactively sending a report of the circumstance to the Law Society of Upper Canada with a detailed list of events, bookkeeping and accounts billed to the client will help your case prior to the client reporting you to the Law Society. Should a paralegal choose to ignore the threat of the client, in hopes that the client will not follow through with higher involvement, the paralegal will then face an audit by the Law Society. If the Law Society is apprised that the

Laxmi (minor at the time of accident) was attacked by three men in an area of New Delhi as she refused to marry one of them. Her face and other parts of the body were disfigured due to the attack and she couldn’t move on in her life because of the accident. Belonging to a middle class family, her family spend all the resources and finances on her treatment and even after 4 surgeries, scars from her face couldn’t be removed. She lost all the hope but the society and her father’s employer helped.