Bismarck Tribune - North Dakota News - Attorney discipline most in decades

Attorney discipline most in decades

Dec 11, 2006 - 04:06:20 CST

FARGO (AP) - North Dakota's Supreme Court suspended seven attorneys' law licenses this year for violating professional conduct codes. It was the most suspensions for lawyers in at least 30 years.

The Supreme Court also placed two more attorneys on interim suspension, preventing them from practicing law until disciplinary proceedings against them conclude.

The number of suspensions is the most since 1976, when records were readily available to check.

"It's really a few bad apples," said Katharine Schaffzin, an assistant law professor at the University of North Dakota, which has the state's only law school.

"Attorneys provide excellent services in the normal course," she said. "They're highly skilled and trained, and their purpose is to serve the client."

In North Dakota, there are 1,885 licensed attorneys, including 545 with out-of-state addresses.

The Supreme Court has suspended 58 attorneys in North Dakota since 1990. Another 22 were disbarred for violating ethical rules. This year marks the first time since 2001 that the Supreme Court didn't disbar at least one attorney.

"For a lawyer to get suspended doesn't mean that lawyer is a bad lawyer," said Bill Neumann, executive director of the State Bar Association of North Dakota and a Supreme Court justice from 1993 to 2005. Neumann said. "It's certainly not a death blow to a lawyer, but it's a serious setback."

Attorneys as a group may be embarrassed by the behavior of a few but the public shouldn't paint them all with a broad brush, he said. Neumann points to the low percentage of lawyers - less than one half of 1 percent - who are suspended each year.

"There are all those lawyer jokes out there but the fact is, lawyers as a group are held to very high standards of behavior," Neumann said. "As a group, we aren't worse than any other group of human beings, but we probably aren't much better."

News > State

Printer friendly version Attorney discipline most in decades

Comments

to thanks wrote on Dec 17, 2006 9:37 AM:

" Maybe he is. Who elso would know better? You should focus on the message and not the messenger. You sound like one of those people that would have put Lord Jesus into anger management (or worse) for his wrath in the temple of the money changers, instead of listening to the message. "

thanks wrote on Dec 16, 2006 8:55 PM:

" sounds like the person that keeps commenting must have experienced something with the supreme court to be so so bitter "

Rand474 wrote on Dec 16, 2006 8:30 AM:

" Bill Neumann says that lawyers are held to "very high standards of hehavior". He used to be a supreme court judge. Standards of judgement and standards of conduct are two entirely different concepts. Alone, each is significant for its own purpose. But, if they are thought of together, then each concept becomes a justification for the other. Thus, the standard, "appearance of impropriety" may and does rear its head for use in invidious judgment. And, when one talks about appearances as the truth...the first thing compromised is the truth. All done in the good name of ethics. "

thanks wrote on Dec 15, 2006 9:49 PM:

" Thanks for the information on how to read about all the lawyers listed in the ND Supreme Court website. I couldn't believe some of the actions these lawyers chose.It's nobody's fault but their own for their choices. What the world were they thinking? It was interesting because it not only lists the 2006 list, but lawyers supsended in the last few years. They spend all this money to go to law school and they throw it away by their stupid choices. Go figure that one out. "

To S.S. wrote on Dec 15, 2006 2:05 PM:

" Go to the website. Click lawyers on the left side. Put in suspended and click the execute button. The first document is the current list of people who are not licensed to practice FOR VARIOUS REASONS. This is not a list of all diciplined lawyers. You will see on the right side, the explaination is given. This is the list for 2006, see the other "results" for previous years. "

Rand474 wrote on Dec 15, 2006 1:43 PM:

" Let's take a look at one aspect of ethical justice: After a period of suspension, the lawyer must satisfy N.D.R. Lawyer Discipl Rule 4.5(F)(5) which requires the lawyer to prove that he/she recognizes the wrongfulness of the misconduct. The practical consequence to the rule requirement is that the lawyer must admit the "true" facts as found by the Board and the Supreme Court acting in deference to the fact-finding power of the Board...that is, if he wants his license back. It doesn't matter that the facts were found by only a preponderance of the evidence burden of proof. Once the lawyer admits the "true" facts...the discipline becomes now justified from the beginning accusations. And, the lawyer takes one step closer to no longer being a "bad apple" but is a "good apple". This is not only an unethical way of justifying discipline..it is significantly immoral ...especially so, if the lawyer knows that the "true facts" are morally untrue. "

S.S. wrote on Dec 15, 2006 12:35 PM:

" Okay, so just because I am curious, how do I find out who these people are? I went to the ND Supreme Court website, but not sure where to go from there. If you aren't going to publish the names, can you at least tell me where to find them at?? "

Rand474 wrote on Dec 15, 2006 8:55 AM:

" There is NO watchdog over the Supreme Court or the Disciplinary Board, other than the voters who can be kept in the dark by double-talk...which lawyers do well. The SC has sole decision power over the rules and procedures. By a single rule adoption, they have declared their own actions (and actions of the Board and Disciplinary Counsel) to be absolutely immune from liability for wrongdoing....including defamation of an individual's character. While it is true that the "appearance" standard is applied to judges by rule of ethics...it can also be invidiously applied to lawyer conduct, while piously declaring another standard of judgment. The ethics system is flawed. Lawyers and judges will probably never admit it. It is easier to point to a few "bad apples" than to admit even the possibility of an injustice to any individual lawyer\person. This way the lawyers can declare the legal profession to be uniquely good...free of injustice...and worthy of the rates charged their clients. "

50/50 to rand474 wrote on Dec 14, 2006 12:21 PM:

" I agree with the last post. The appearance of impropriety means that a person, without knowledge of the facts, would assume that something he/she saw or heard was inappropriate or a violation of a rule/regulation.. Lawyers know what is wrong & what is right.You decide your own actions and are responsible for them, no one else. Get over it. Thank God we have a Supreme Court that regulates and decides the actions of lawyers. Remember, a few bad apples shouldn't spoil the whole bunch! You really sound very cynical and angry about our system. "

To rand474 wrote on Dec 14, 2006 11:41 AM:

" Ok, I realize you sound like you know what you are talking about becuase the words you used are big and legal, but you entirely misstated the rules applicable to lawyers. The fact is that ND has some of the lowest malpractice of anywhere, most likely because most of them are from ND and have ND values. However, there are bad apples in any profession - accounting, just look to Enron, doctors - just look to malpractice like leaving instruments in people during surgery, sports - just look to arrests, etc., politics - ok, look at just about all of them some of the time, teachers - just look to the ones that sleep with their students... It's endless. At least lawyers self regulate and dicipline themselves. Because, that is what it is, the lawyers are the ones that make the rules and enforce the rules. The Courts approve the dicipline. "

Incredulous wrote on Dec 14, 2006 11:10 AM:

" You clearly don't understand what the "appearance of impropriety" means nor do you understand the standards under which an attorney's conduct is measured. It's a very strict rule, not a license to run wild. Aside from that, judges, not lawyers, are bound by that rule. "

rand474 wrote on Dec 14, 2006 8:42 AM:

" People need to know that the standard of judgement in these ethical cases is alot of times something called "an appearance of impropriety"...either by declaration or by implication. Under such reasoning, powerful decision-making lawyers can declare half-truths, implications and innuendos to be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. There are few things in our system of government that are as corrupt, unjust or hypocritical as the lawyer ethics system of justice. These powerful people have absolute immunity to say anything they desire or to do anything they please. Power corrupts, but absolute power absolutely corrupts. How often do you think the truth gets compromised to make the legal profession look good?? Lawyers themselves have made the profession a disgustly bad one...not common people. Keep the lawyer jokes coming...they are sometimes more honest than the legal profession itself. "

hugo wrote on Dec 13, 2006 9:01 AM:

" the ones i've read about in the past have all deserved the actions handed down. in some cases i felt that some attorneys were let off too easy. "

To Legal Jargon wrote on Dec 13, 2006 8:57 AM:

" I'm not sure what your point is, but I imagine the Court does that. They likely notified the media with their opinion on the discipline. Whether the Tribune chooses to write about it is another question. The rule doesn't mean the Court has to take out some kind of ad, classified, or something. "

Legal Jargon wrote on Dec 12, 2006 3:45 PM:

" Upon an attorney being suspended or reprimanded, in addition to the attorney's identity being posted on the S.Court website, Rule 6.2 of the ND Disciplinary Rules provides that the Supreme Court shall notify "the official newspaper of the county in which the lawyer maintained an office for the practice of law. The notice must clearly identify the lawyer affected by the order and contain a summary of the circumstances which resulted in the action taken including a reference to the appropriate rule or statute." "

pokey wrote on Dec 12, 2006 1:55 PM:

" At the time of the actual incidents I seem to remember blurbs in the paper about the misconduct. No need to drag them through the mud again. How many other professions get called out in public for a screw up? It's not a whole lot. "

NoDak John wrote on Dec 12, 2006 10:22 AM:

" Personally, I think that we should all celebrate the fact that at least in North Dakota the attorneys have had to answer for misconduct. Name another state which has held their attorneys to as high a standard. "

M wrote on Dec 12, 2006 9:58 AM:

" they should. everything else is listed. maybe an insert for the sunday paper. instead of "celebration" it could be "vindication" "

To M wrote on Dec 12, 2006 7:27 AM:

" They also don't print a list of sex offenders every time they write about them. Come on. "

Online Editor wrote on Dec 11, 2006 7:39 PM:

" To readers: The story was picked up from the Associated Press, I'm not sure why they didn't include the list. If someone would like to find the list, we will publish the link to it. "

alittleconcered wrote on Dec 11, 2006 7:36 PM:

" I agree- why weren't the names of the attorney's put in the paper,like most other articles do. Just wondering? I know how to research to find the names in the ND Supremem Court website, but, some people don't and they do have the right to know. "

M wrote on Dec 11, 2006 4:57 PM:

" i don't care to do the search. the article should provide this like they do on so many other things. sometimes the info is provided and sometimes it is not. just wondering why "

cone 1 wrote on Dec 11, 2006 1:57 PM:

" WHY DID U NOT PUBLISH THERE NAMES. LIKE EVERY OTHER PERSON YOU DO. MUST BE PRACTIAL TO THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE. "

Incredulous wrote on Dec 11, 2006 10:49 AM:

" M. Do some of your own research. Each disciplinary action is published online on the North Dakota Supreme Court website. No one is hiding the ball here. "

PO3 wrote on Dec 11, 2006 10:12 AM:

" Crooked attorneys, I don't believe it. Thats like saying there are crooked politicians. Please refrain from saying those things about the 2 most honest careers anyone can go choose to go into. "

M wrote on Dec 11, 2006 9:44 AM:

" nice words NoDak, must be an attorney. They know, and what I'd like to know is their names. Why are they not published in the article? I'm sure the list is available. "

Dan wrote on Dec 11, 2006 9:28 AM:

" Yeah, 99% of lawyers give the rest of them a bad name... "

NoDak John wrote on Dec 11, 2006 9:21 AM:

" Most assuredly the people need to keep a watchful eye on any body which operates as a quasi branch of OUR government. Since the BAR (British Accreditation Registry) is a foreign corporation incorporated in England and owned by the Rothschild family, I wonder upon whose orders those attorneys were prosecuted. Perhaps the members of the ND BAR were totally unaware of their progenitor and were acting nobly. "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.