Suspended attorneys allowed to represent parties in court–a Due Process Challenge

And from Andy Ostrowski, a fellow attorney suspended for blogging about corruption in Pennsylvania, the land of “Kids for Cash” comes this article:

http://attorneyindependence.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-lame-first-step-towards.html

Some great arguments are made in this article as to why suspended lawyers should be able to represent members of the public, especially when the client is 1) informed of the nature of the suspension 2) does not agree with it (corruption, First Amendment, whatever) and 3) wants to hire the attorney regardless.

The difference between just running into court and asking to represent a client and what happened in the Ostrowski representation case is that both suspended lawyers wanted to appear to represent someone in an administrative proceeding that for some reason, did not require a lawyer (it was determined that another person could appear on behalf of the client, which is actual BS meaning the authorities are only recognizing that no lawyers want to do these types of hearings, they’re too penny ante).  However, there was a question as to whether they could appear because their suspension rules say they can’t represent anyone at a hearing, which means their rights would be diminished to less than that of an ordinary citizen.  The court ruled they could based on due process, but I think there’s an argument for due process, right to counsel of choice under the Bill of Rights and equal protection (weakest argument, that people who are victims of corruption can have lawyers who are experts in corruption who speak out against it and have been suspended as a result of the “code of silence” rule currently in force and effect.

The article presents many interesting concepts such as can a client waive the suspension, can a judge over rule it and let the attorney appear, does it matter if the client cannot find representation otherwise due to lack of funds, that other attorneys won’t go up against a corrupt system and all types of nuances in the right to representation and to contract guaranteed by the US Constitution and state constitutions such as Illinois.

Since my case was all fraud on the court, I really do not take much of this seriously, and as a personal aside, neither do my kids or any of my clients.  My kids actually tell me, “mom when are they going to realize you’re just goofing off and aren’t doing any real work any longer, and they’re going to make you go back to (slave labor) work again.”  Okay, that’s actually funny.  I AM on vacation, doing what I want, sleeping in, writing books and blogging.  Fun, fun, fun for me.  But I still get to say that Jerome Larkin is corrupt and has $1.2 million in unexplained loans on his property and told a reporter “no comment” and refused to reply when she called him on the carpet for it.  I still get to accuse Leah Black Guiterrez of how her $220k+ mortgage got paid off within a year or two.  I get to blog and I get to write books on the corruption in cook county (which everyone knows about) and I still get to investigate all this and call for the removal of these PNS–psychopaths, narcissists and sociopaths.

I get to tell you about tests for PNS and why isn’t the ARDC requiring that for their staff and most of all Jerome Larkin?  I want to know why.  And I want to know why they don’t file Ethics Reports.  I want to know who is paying off all these mortgages.

You see, I haven’t gone away, and their “supsending” me is absolutely ludicrious. Everyone knows I haven’t done anything wrong.  The fact that the ABA twice, not one time, but twice had to pull comments totally in favor of me under the First Amendment is equally laughable.

The ARDC, in light of Rosemond v. Kentucky should just admit defeat and cancel my suspension.  It’s a joke.  It has no effect on what I am going to do with my life and how I am going to help people and how I am sworn to uphold the US and Illinois constitution and out these suppressors of corruption, death and evil for disableds and seniors and I’m not going away.

Why don’t they just steal money from the banks and other corporations?  Why do they steal from seniors and the disableds?  Go steal from the big boys and stop rolling drunks.

JoAnne

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s