Giuliani suspended from practicing law

[ThatRobGuy]

The high standards of ethics is consistent with the legal profession, much to the distorted perception by the public.

...eh...I don't know how high the ethical standards actually are in that profession as a whole.

There are certainly sub-sets of that profession (like estate planning lawyers) that are good ethical people. But if you're a defense attorney or a corporate staff attorney, most of your time is spent looking for loopholes in the law to get your client off the hook for something they more than likely did...and if it's one of the "ambulance chaser" style attorneys, ethics is out the window.

To clarify, it shouldn't be that way, it should be an honorable profession...but that's not the way it's ended up.

If someone gets in a fender bender, we shouldn't have people's spouses getting settlements for "loss of companionship" because the lawyer is trying to grift an insurance company because they know it'll be cheaper/easier to settle than to actually fight a bogus claim.

 

[FireDragon76]

...eh...I don't know how high the ethical standards actually are in that profession as a whole.

There are certainly sub-sets of that profession (like estate planning lawyers) that are good ethical people. But if you're a defense attorney or a corporate staff attorney, most of your time is spent looking for loopholes in the law to get your client off the hook for something they more than likely did...and if it's one of the "ambulance chaser" style attorneys, ethics is out the window.

Yes, that's part of the ethical standards of the profession. Our system wouldn't work if defense attorney's didn't give their clients the best defense possible. That doesn't mean they are dishonest, unethical people.

 

[cow451]

...eh...I don't know how high the ethical standards actually are in that profession as a whole.

There are certainly sub-sets of that profession (like estate planning lawyers) that are good ethical people. But if you're a defense attorney or a corporate staff attorney, most of your time is spent looking for loopholes in the law to get your client off the hook for something they more than likely did...and if it's one of the "ambulance chaser" style attorneys, ethics is out the window.

To clarify, it shouldn't be that way, it should be an honorable profession...but that's not the way it's ended up.

If someone gets in a fender bender, we shouldn't have people's spouses getting settlements for "loss of companionship" because the lawyer is trying to grift an insurance company because they know it'll be cheaper/easier to settle than to actually fight a bogus claim.

A poster seems to forget that both sides have legal representation. Insurance companies pay their lawyers quite well.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

A poster seems to forget that both sides have legal representation. Insurance companies pay their lawyers quite well.

They do, perhaps I'm just jaded by the fact that I used to work for an insurance company (albeit it, only in a tech capacity, but still had to interact with them on occasion), and had to hear them coach us on on saying "I don't recall" or "I don't remember anything like that" during certain depositions.

I was glad to get out of that place lol.

"were you ever instructed to delete data pertaining to claim/client XYZ"

Me: "yes"

Corporate Attorney: "well, it's possible you could be misremembering, so if you don't 100% remember all of the details, it's okay to say that you don't recall when they ask"

Me: "I remember the meeting, <Director of Underwriting> asked us to purge the data"

Corporate Attorney: "well, you never want to say anything like that unless you completely remember every detail of that meeting, do you remember every single detail of that meeting?"

...and it would be sort of a circular conversation like that until I would cave and say "okay, I don't remember every detail of that meeting" and they would say "okay, great, so if they ask you anything about that meeting, we'd advise that you'd just say that you don't remember the details when asked about it"

...basically implying that, if I didn't remember the color of the clock that was on the wall in his office, I should just reply with "I don't remember the details" for every question they asked.


Needless to say, I have no intention of ever working for an insurance company again.

 

[cow451]

Needless to say, I have no intention of ever working for an insurance company again.

A poster is commended for abandoning the Evil Ones.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

A poster is commended for abandoning the Evil Ones.

Yes, the company I've worked for, for the last 15 years isn't perfect, but definitely not as sketchy as working for the insurance company I used to work for...

Although, that could be a problem specific to American insurance companies, where the goal is to collect the highest level of premiums, and pay out as little as humanly possible when they actually try to use the insurance policy they paid for.

 

[cow451]

Yes, the company I've worked for, for the last 15 years isn't perfect, but definitely not as sketchy as working for the insurance company I used to work for...

Although, that could be a problem specific to American insurance companies, where the goal is to collect the highest level of premiums, and pay out as little as humanly possible when they actually try to use the insurance policy they paid for.

A poster accurately notes the mission statement of many insurance companies.

 

[Tinker Grey]

A poster accurately notes the mission statement of many insurance companies.

A poster has developed the annoying habit of referring to his interlocutors in the third person.

 

[cow451]

A poster has developed the annoying habit of referring to his interlocutors in the third person.

A poster’s opinion is noted.

 

[wing2000]

Does this mean Rudy can't give "legal advice" to Donald in prison?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Does this mean Rudy can't give "legal advice" to Donald in prison?

Rudy can give "advice" to whoever he wants to -- let us hope Donald is foolish enough to take it.

 

[Arcangl86]

Was Borat even around back then?

Kidding obviously, I understand the point you're making. I would agree that Rudy is "off his rocker" at this point in his life... more than Johnnie ever was. Although there was a time when Rudy kicked butt in court as well. He was the the guy who led the federal prosecution against the mafia in his day.

...but obviously Johnnie was "quirky", using rhyming slogans in court...and a comedic mind like that of Larry David and Jerry Seinfeld wouldn't have created a character based on him (Jackie Chiles) if there wasn't something humorous or "unique" about his style & behavior.

...and representing people who were more reprehensible than Trump IMO (and I don't say that lightly, because I was no fan of Trump) like OJ Simpson and Tookie Williams and Michael Jackson...

The difference is though, did he outright lie in service to his client? That's what Rudy got in trouble for, not how odious his client is.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

The difference is though, did he outright lie in service to his client? That's what Rudy got in trouble for, not how odious his client is.

I would say Yes.

(if you're familiar with his statements in court regarding the nature of the OJ Simpson case)

...but it's the job of a defense attorney to raise doubt in the minds of the judge or jury, I'm not faulting Johnnie for that. I'm just saying that if "twisting the truth" or "being deliberately misleading" is grounds for yanking someone's ability to practice law, Rudy certainly isn't the only one guilty of that.

I still think Rudy is looney, and has lost his marbles somewhere along the way (as did Sidney Powell)...perhaps they got wrapped up in the cult-like worship of Trump like many others did?

But none the less, going against Trump allies has become a cheap way of scoring political points.

 

[Arcangl86]

I would say Yes.

(if you're familiar with his statements in court regarding the nature of the OJ Simpson case)

...but it's the job of a defense attorney to raise doubt in the minds of the judge or jury, I'm not faulting Johnnie for that. I'm just saying that if "twisting the truth" or "being deliberately misleading" is grounds for yanking someone's ability to practice law, Rudy certainly isn't the only one guilty of that.

I still think Rudy is looney, and has lost his marbles somewhere along the way (as did Sidney Powell)...perhaps they got wrapped up in the cult-like worship of Trump like many others did?

But none the less, going against Trump allies has become a cheap way of scoring political points.

I'm actually not too familiar with the OJ trial. I'm of the age where I remember it being a big deal, but not understanding why. The only thing i really know is the "If it doesn't fit you must acquit" and even that is portrayed differently in the popular consciousness then in actuality. There is a difference between creating doubt and outright stating untruths though.

 

[NxNW]

I'm actually not too familiar with the OJ trial. I'm of the age where I remember it being a big deal, but not understanding why. The only thing i really know is the "If it doesn't fit you must acquit" and even that is portrayed differently in the popular consciousness then in actuality. There is a difference between creating doubt and outright stating untruths though.

I was watching TV when they cut to OJ's Bronco run, and eventually arrested him at his house. And I was watching when the verdict was announced. Yes, the whole thing was a big deal.

 

[The Barbarian]

Not sure I agree with disbarring someone just for going around saying false things, not even for a grotesque liar like Giuliani.

Lying to a court is a different issue. This is really a tragedy. Guiliani was "America's Mayor" who served well in 9/11. Then something happened. His character changed, his marriage crumbled, and he fell into Trump's orbit.

Is there anyone who has associated him or herself with Donald Trump who has not been damaged thereby?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Add Washington DC to the places where Rudy cannot practice law.

The appeals court in DC said Giuliani would be suspended from working as an attorney in the city "pending outcome" of his situation in New York, according to disciplinary court records.

Giuliani doesn't regularly practice law in court -- and hadn't for several years before representing then-President Donald Trump in 2020 in a failed legal bid to throw out the popular vote in Pennsylvania and other states. But the law license suspension is still a major blow to the former Manhattan US attorney and political figure, once considered an accomplished and formidable force in legal circles.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Add Washington DC to the places where Rudy cannot practice law.

The appeals court in DC said Giuliani would be suspended from working as an attorney in the city "pending outcome" of his situation in New York, according to disciplinary court records.

Giuliani hit with ethics charge by DC Bar over false election fraud claims

The D.C. Bar’s disciplinary arm said that he had violated the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct by bringing a proceeding and asserting “issues therein without a non-frivolous basis in law and fact for doing so” and engaging “in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice,” according to the filing.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

Giuliani hit with ethics charge by DC Bar over false election fraud claims

The D.C. Bar’s disciplinary arm said that he had violated the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct by bringing a proceeding and asserting “issues therein without a non-frivolous basis in law and fact for doing so” and engaging “in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice,” according to the filing.

I guess when you work for bad people. You get in trouble.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I guess when you work for bad people. You get in trouble.

Even evil people deserve competent, ethical legal representation.

Giuliani is paying the price for his own lapse of judgment and ethical standards. It shouldn't be about who his client is.