Miers Led Lawfirm Repeatedlly Forced To Pay Damages F/Defrauding Investors

[KittyWampus]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/miers-led-law-firm-repeat_b_8277.html
From D.Sirota:

MIERS LED LAWFIRM REPEATEDLY FORCED TO PAY DAMAGES FOR DEFRAUDING INVESTORS

"Miers... while heading a major Texas corporate law firm (Locke, Liddell & Sapp)... the firm was forced to pay $22 million to settle a suit asserting that "it aided a client in defrauding investors."

The details of the case are both nauseating and highly troubling, considering President Bush is considering putting Miers at the top of America's legal system. Under Miers' leadership, the firm represented the head of a "foreign currency trading company was allegedly a Ponzi scheme." The law-firm admitted that it "knew in March 1998 that $ 8 million in losses hadn't been reported to investors" but didn't tell regulators.

This wasn't an isolated incident, either... in 2001Miers' lawfirm was forced to pay another $8 million for a similar scheme to defraud investors.... Miers' firm helped a now-convicted con man "defraud investors and allowed the firm's account to be used as a 'conduit.'" The suit said "money from investors that went into the firm's trust account was deposited into bank accounts and was used to pay for his 'expensive toys.'"

If you think Miers wasn't involved in any of this -- think again. Miers wasn't just any old lawyer at the firm. She was the Managing Partner -- the big cheese. ...."

Either Managing Partner Harriet was aware of both instances of fraud resulting in millions of dollars of investor losses or she is an incompetent executive not worthy of the SCOTUS.

[seabeyond]

1. this shit needs to go to the senators n/t

[clydefrand]

2. incompetent ....isn't this par for the course in this administration?

[Oversea Visitor]

3. Culture of Corruption

:rofl:

[MissMarple]

37. George and his cronies are so immersed in it they don't see it any more.

These people think being corrupt is normal. Yes, indeed, a culture of corruption so pervasive they probably think everyone else in the world are just stupid marks. It's all about them and their "friends".

[janetle]

44. Yep, Culture of Cronyism and Corruption.....

There's our bumper sticker.

[KoKo]

4. Send it to Kos and other sites including Sen. Schumer who are saying

just take a pass on Miers. She's a nobody...a plain old lawyer...lets trash our Left Wing of the Dems and include them with the Right Wing Loonies...and we are Golden.

Send it to Harry Reid who had NO PROBLEM with her. My goodness what a relief it is that Bush didn't sent us a REALLY RIGH WINGER....ummm...a Really RW'er would be an extremist on the Right...but I digress. :-(

[ClintonTyree]

25. bush sent one to the Senate......

that's just as loony as the rest of them but all she's lacking is the paper trail. That's starting to unravel too though and we're finding she's nothing more than another Corporate whore, anti-choice, Theo-fascist wing-nut in sheep's clothing.
This didn't pass the smell test right from the beginning and it's starting to stink more and more with each passing hour.
However, I expect the Dems in the Senate to bend over and take another one up the you know where and confirm her with no opposition at all. They'll just "ask tough questions of her"! :scared: Ooooh!! Tough questions! Of course she won't answer any of them but they'll ask them, THEN confirm her. :eyes: What happened to our Democratic leadership?

[GoreDean2008]

53. Let Kos and Reid Play a Game Little Bit

Actually, it is fun to sit and watch the conservative sides implode over Miers before we make a full-scale opposition on Miers. Let the conservatives bash Bush for a while. Kos and Reid will change their minds if anything substantial comes up.

[RaleighNCDUer]

65. You say that as if criminal fraud is not substantial. nt

[mod mom]

67. Makes you wonder if the consters have something on them, doesn't it? nt

[chat_noir]

5. LOCKE LIDDELL: $ 22 Mil Settlement Serves as Warning to Other Law Firms

Locke Liddell & Sapp's agreement to pay $ 22 million to settle a suit
alleging it aided a client in defrauding investors is expected to serveas a warning to other firms that they must take action when they learn a client's alleged wrongdoing may be harming third parties. The Dallas-based firm agreed April 14 to settle a suit stemming from its representation of Russell Erxleben, a former University of Texas star football kicker whose foreign currency trading company was allegedly a Ponzi scheme. Erxleben pleaded guilty last November to federal conspiracy and securities-fraud charges and is to be sentenced in May.

Locke Liddell's settlement comes on the heels of an $ 8.5 million
settlement by Houston's Sheinfeld, Maley & Kay and attorney Lee Polson.

The two settlements, minus attorneys' fees and expenses, are expected to bring investors a recovery of more than 60 cents on the dollar. And if those large settlements don't get lawyers' attention, the American Law Institute is considering making a lawyer's duty to a third party clear in its Restatement of the Law Governing Lawyers.

http://bankrupt.com/CAR_Public/000501.MBX

[PeaceProgProsp]

7. Apparently it wasn't even a warning to her own firm.

!

[ClintonTyree]

27. How many honest people are there in Texas anyway?

Besides all of our Texas DUers, that is. Texas seems to be a hot-bed of graft, corruption and political strong-arming. Has it always been that way there?
Florida's not much better, and look who the Governor there is. Any connection? Ya' think? :shrug:
The bush family evil empire, it's never been more evident or evil.

[me b zola]

50. This slays me

Why aren't the lawyers in the firm disbarred? :grr:

[PeaceProgProsp]

6. If she was the client relation partner on those deals, it would be even

worse for her. If she did work on those deals, that would be the worst thing.

That this happened twice makes you wonder whether she told the firm to cut that shit out after the first one, or if she just told them not to get caught next time.

[pbartch]

28. If she did work on those deals.....she should be dis-barred

she doesn't deserve to represent clients!!

[Weembo]

41. She didn't.

She was in Dallas and the problems arose in Austin. I was in the Houston office. I won't, however, publically discuss my thoughts on her (too many pitfalls).

[Rex]

8. Using the Repukican method - she is perfectly qualified for the job.

Unethical, greedy, fundie, Bush lover. It's ironic that the moderates will have to be the ones to save us from this nightmare.

[MellowOne]

35. She is qualified

She'll fit right in with the rest of the crooks. It's like Bush is placing his prawns in place to gain control.

[ashling]

55. Bush's shrimp?

"Prawns"?

[Digit]

9. Kicking

[MellowOne]

69. LOL Okay, I can't type

I meant pawns like in a chess game.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

10. Very big, very important

This could be disqualifying just on the face of it. "defrauding" investors?? Not reporting after aware?!! Giant fines? Does anyone in this White House vet anyone?

[ClintonTyree]

29. Sure they do.......

if they're loyal to the core and are "willing to take one for the president", they're vetted! No other qualifications are needed. Hell, they don't even have to be a Republican. Look at Zell Miller! He's as loyal a bush sycophant as there is, and he's a "democrat". :eyes:

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

11. kick

[annabanana]

12. nominated....(one more) n/t

[drm604]

13. kick

:kick:

[KittyWampus]

14. well, this needs a few more reads.

[Bozita]

15. nominated ... thank you!

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

16. Why didn't this result in criminal investigations and indictments?

And it would seem that the Texas State Bar's disciplinary branch should have investigated this as well. I wonder if they did. And I wonder what the statute of limitations is in Texas on criminal fraud.

The files from these civil lawsuits should be examined for any depositions or any responses to written interrogatories involving Harriet Miers and whether she committed perjury under oath. Also, the identities of the actual attorneys who handled these cases should be known and whether Harriet Miers had any close involvement.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

17. Here's her webpage at the Texas State Bar

http://www.texasbar.com/Template.cfm?Section=Member_Directory&template=/Customsource/MemberDirectory/MemberDirectoryDetail.cfm&ContactID=148215

Regarding any public history of disciplinary action, it only says:

"No profile data on file for Disciplinary History - State Bar of Texas"

But it also has an asterisk (*) next to that. I don't know what that asterisk refers to. I see another asterisk by her bar number, but I don't know if the two are connected. She has a very, very low bar number, although she was admitted in 1970. I wonder if somehow she managed to change bar numbers or some other strange thing. That bar number is unbelievably low, as though she was one of the first attorneys admitted to practice in the state (00000067) after the Texas State Bar started handing out numbers to its members. James Baker (former Secretary of State) of Baker & Botts, Houston, for example, was admitted to practice in Texas in 1957 but has a much higher bar number than Miers. Something is very odd here. Perhaps Texas has an odd system for handing out bar numbers that is not based on order of admittance to the bar (but that would surprise me).

[WolverineDG]

19. i haven't figured it out

folks who graduated at or near the time i did have bar numbers that start "240." folks who graduated before me have bar numbers that start "007." i was a year late for a 007 number. :(

dg

[WolverineDG]

20. nothing fishy about the asterisks

i just checked my profile & there are asterisks in the same places. :)

dg

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

21. But maybe it means that only that bar number is connected to the record

of discipline (both having asterisks). Why would an asterisk be necessary at all? I still find a bar number of 67 extremely low. How would someone get such a low bar number? I guess I'm going by California which hands out bar numbers systematically in order of admittance to the bar after passing the bar exam.

[WolverineDG]

22. i haven't a clue why the asterisks are there

all i know is they are in the same places on my bar profile & i KNOW nothing's fishy about mine. if you're really that curious, you can do a search by bar # alone, so why don't you see who's #66 & #68? :)

dg

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

26. Bizarre - 66 and 68 were admitted before Miers

One in 1965 and the other in 1968. But even those numbers are extremely low considering the dates of admittance. Maybe the bar numbers got so high that they decided at one point to go back to zero and start giving out bar numbers of now dead individuals.

[WolverineDG]

48. prior to the requirement of passing a bar exam

i don't know how numbers were allocated. admission to the bar has changed over the past several decades, and i'm not sure when the bar started giving out bar numbers. but there's nothing unusual about her bar profile that i can see.

dg

[WolverineDG]

49. bar number 00000001

is the current chief justice of the texas supreme court. i'd say if her number has changed, then you're going to have to search courthouses for pleadings & other court docs with her name on them.

dg

[Bozita]

32. Didn't Bush get a NEW Texas drivers license when he became governor?

Came with a real low number too.

Just like Harriet.

[marions ghost]

60. I agree this should be looked into BUT...

Logical question posted by aint_no_life_nowhere (#16): "Why didn't this result in criminal investigations and indictments? And it would seem that the Texas State Bar's disciplinary branch should have investigated this as well."

---------my comments:

Y'know the way the corporate sector looks at this --it's all 'just bidness...' The Culture of Corruption is what's really destroying this country; the Bush Crime Family & Associates are the tip of the iceberg.

I'm sorry but I have to horse laugh with extra cynicism at the suggestion that the Texas State Bar is really going to police itself. (Anybody out there working in the legal field care to refute that statement?) No matter what the area of professional crime, State Boards are passive and dysfunctional. You know why you don't hear much about the prosecution of criminal fraud? Because it goes on all the time, and at some very high levels, but unless the perpetrators are caught by equally well-heeled victims (as in this case), and the case becomes very public (ie. Enron), it is NOT prosecuted. The estimates of monetary losses from white collar crime are over $50 Billion annually, but you can't even get good statistics on it. The US Dept of Justice doesn't track white collar crime effectively. Their emphasis is drugs, street crime, and terrorism.

This has to change. Maybe the incredible excesses of the current regime will open some eyes to the truth about professional crime. But we do not have the mechanisms in place to effectively deal with this degree of corruption at present.

"In the 1990's ethics training programs were beefed up in US businesses, but a 2001 study "found ethics programs tended to rely too heavily on asking individual employees to do the right thing and disregarded the impact of organizational culture on people's behavior. ...The case of Arthur Anderson is especially ironic. Even as it made hundreds of millions in its ethics consulting division, Anderson refused to establish an internal ethics compliance program..."

---(excerpt from the book "The Cheating Culture" by David Callahan http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0156030055/qid=1128511865/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/104-7076526-8691966?v=glance&s=books
'While honesty is a nice ideal, Callahan says that cheaters cheat because, contrary to oft-repeated axioms, cheaters win: the chances of being caught are shrinking as are the punishments meted out should one be nabbed, and the benefits of a successful cheat far outstrip any potential threat.'

[Norquist Nemesis]

18. Hey! It wasn't HER fault!

It was those damned trial lawyers working under her! :evilgrin:

[gratuitous]

23. I seem to recall a big stink about Hillary at the Rose Law Firm

One of the associates under her was involved with Jim McDougall and his financial shenanigans, and she billed an hour or so setting up the file at the firm. Kenneth Starr and his elves made a big deal about that, how it proved beyond any shadow of a doubt what a sleazy lawyer Hillary was, William Safire going so far as to say it proved she was a congenital liar.

I expect to go deaf from the sound of the crickets drowning out the high dudgeon from the right wing about the irregularities at Locke, Liddell & Sapp whilst St. Harriet was at the helm.

[Alva Goldbook]

24. Is Miers really "the best person" Bush "could find"

We should all be happy with the nomination of Harriet Miers. Bush said she was "the best person I could find" and we all know her qualifications are incredible: she's the former head of the Texas Lottery Commission!!! This is no nobody. She's no Brownie. And the best thing of all....she's never run the International Arabian Horse Association.

http://nitwitplanet.blogspot.com

[ClintonTyree]

30. The best sucking sycophant he could find.........

without a visible paper trail. We'll actually have to work to find the skeletons in this one's closet. How many documents do you think will be "unavailable for review" for THIS treacherous toady?

[AllyCat]

31. Welcome to DU, Alva G!

I know that there have been SC justices with no judicial experience, but they reportedly have fascinating resumes that would lead one to believe they might have some experience defending the Constitution.

This one has never argued a Constitutional case? I read your blog, is that what you are saying? That's horrible if true. How can she interpret the Constitution then?

[chelsea0011]

46. Yes. As Jon Stewert said on the Daily Show............

He looked down the hallway and saw a black man and a woman, and picked the woman.

[marions ghost]

70. kinda simplistic

he had several women to pick from...

[AllyCat]

33. Sent to MoveOn's citizen research/journalism campaign

They are logging all this stuff. You have to have a link with dates to post an issue/item.

[On the Road]

34. The Good News is WHO She Was Derfrauding

Not the poor and dispossessed.

Investors. Mutual funds and pension plan managers. The affluent. They don't take kindly to being cheated, and they have some pull.

Who knows if this will make any difference. But it should make a lot of Republicans very uneasy.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

36. Here's an article giving more details

The two attorneys handling the two specific cases in which fraud was alleged were Dan Matheson and Phillip Wylie. They were apparently partners and bringing in big bucks for the firm.

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:vUUX0HpxL-0J:www.texasmonthly.com/mag/issues/2001-11-01/law.php%3Fclick_code%3Dba8cce8970cee30fe16a73e2bb499d47+Locke,+Liddell+%26+Sapp+%2422+million+settlement&hl=en

[marions ghost]

66. Good article--thanks!

That article spells out in detail what happened in Mier's law firm Locke Liddell that she co-managed in 2000:

(excerpt) "In April 2000 the firm agreed to pay defrauded AFI customers $22 million. Not even a year and a half later, a Travis County district judge okayed an $8.5 million settlement by Locke Liddell for Brian Stearns' investors. Although most of the $30 million tab will be picked up by the firm's malpractice insurance, the size of the claims, that nasty word "fraud," and Locke Liddell's surrender without going to trial—as well as a $26 million suit brought by other Stearns' investors that the firm is still fighting in New York City—sent shock waves through the Texas legal community. The firm brought in $175 million in gross revenue last year and employs some 435 attorneys spread out in offices in Dallas, Houston, Austin, and New Orleans. One of its co-managing partners at the time, Harriet Miers, a former president of the State Bar of Texas and onetime lawyer for George W. Bush, is on the White House staff."
(more)
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:vUUX0HpxL-0J:www.texasmonthly.com/mag/issues/2001-11-01/law.php%3Fclick_code%3Dba8cce8970cee30fe16a73e2bb499d47+Locke,+Liddell+%26+Sapp+%2422+million+settlement&hl=en

So this is the kind of background appropriate for a SCOTUS justice?!? :crazy:

[The Witch]

38. related to frist's medicare fraud hospital?

these guys really are a crime family.

[PapaJoe]

39. "Bin Laden determined to attack U.S."

I just read on Rawstory that 'twas Harriet that gave W the memo warning of Al Qaida attacks.

[Bozita]

40. "Every piece of paper passed through her hands."

Read it somewhere. Can't recall the source.

[Divine Discontent]

54. you are correct!!!!!!!!!!

my mom said that today on the phone to me, that HARRIET is the very woman who handed Bush the "osama bin laden determined to attack within the United States" briefing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



ANYONE????????

Wait, the Senators won't care, they're already saying nice things. grrrrrrrrrr

[cantstandbush]

42. This alone should be enough to stop this nomination.

I think she is another corrupt puppet who will do what the puppetmeisters tell her.

[sui generis]

43. real estate sales law: show them the one they can't have

then show them the one they don't want

then show them the one you want them to buy.
__________________________

If I were a betting sui, I'd betcha she's the one "we don't want".

I wonder who Bush has waiting in the wings that he's really trying to get on the bench.

[november3rd]

56. Yeah

That's what I'm wondering, too.

[Dora]

45. kick

[savemefromdumbya]

47. Bush has a habit of picking some 'duds' look at Mr FEMABrown

As Howard Dean pointed out the GOP are mostly corrupt! No one believed him

[KittyWampus]

51. good lord, someone just posted in another thread Miers must be a good

administrator

[DemFromMem]

52. Reality check

Not to pour water on this discussion, but as one who actually worked in a large law firm during an earlier time in my life, I can tell you that some firms - not all, but many - are really a collection of lawyers operating their individual practices under a single roof. Unless I heard that Miers actually had knowledge of the bad conduct, I don't know that I would blame her.

She actually SETTLED these suits. She might have pushed to fight them. Part of managing a major law firm is to know what to do when there's been a screw up. And there will inevitably be bad apples and screw ups. There are in any major kind of business. Does the business seek to do the right thing when something bad happens? That's the question to ask. What happened to the lawyers involved in the case? Were they terminated or severely disciplined? That would tell me more about Harriet Miers than whether she happened to be the managing partner of a firm with hundreds of lawyers that was forced to settle a couple of cases.

I for one am looking for reasons to take Miers. Did you people see the list of alternative names that were considered? Miers is a win for the Democrats. If she is taken down, you're deluding yourselves if you think we'll get someone we like a lot better.

[Gnostic]

57. Good post

All you say may be very true, and until now I have bitten my tongue to say anything derogatory concerning this nomination. The fairly obvious cronyism is bothersome, but you are correct in that there could be far worse.

I am waiting though to hear her actually commit herself to any one agenda. I want to know her views, and the way she will interpret, landmarks such as Roe v Wade, and how original or independant she will be on the bench.

Long as these questions go unanswered, she very well could become a Democrat or progressive's nightmare.

[eridani]

59. In what way is she a win?

Seriously. Absolutely no street cred as a judge. (Warren had been a governor and Taft a president, AFAIK.)

[TheMadMonk]

62. Reality, reality check.

Sorry, she was the managing partner. She at the very least bears a moral (yes I know, hard ask) responsibility for the actions of the firm, particularly when the same offense occurs not once but twice.

She knew of the first case of bad conduct and then it happened again. And there's a third in New York, they're fighting this one.

She settled the suits? How does that make her better? When a lawyer advises a client to settle, it's because that lawyer knows they have been handed an unwinnable case. When a firm of lawyers settle, you can be damned sure that they know their case is unwinnable. At the very least, her descission to settle saved the firm 40 cents in the dollar. And actually quite a bit more when you consider possible punitive awards the legal fees they would have been saddled with.

Just checked the site referenced in post 36. It would appear that Miers may have come in after the fact (the article is not clear on its timeline), but even if so, she still settled. That's damage control, not concern for the defrauded.

Further from the article, it is clear at the very best that those involved were criminally incompetent, too busy chasing dollar signs to see what was right in front of them. More likely they were in it up to their necks, they knew that at least one of the clients was dodgy almost from the get go (they did the check themselves) and yet they took him on anyway. If that was any sort of incompetence it would total legal incompetence, and I think even in Texas this would disqualify a person from the bar.

Was Miers directly involved? No.
Was she aware of what was going on? Probably not specifically, but she would likely have a fair idea of SOP within the firm, even if Dexter was carefully kept unware of what Sinister was up to.
Is she suitable for the job? Not a frigging hope. She is all but a self-confessed Repuke "yes" person. Her views on abortion (and other hot topics) are somewhat to highly suspect.


One almost has to wonder if these appointments, beyond giving The Party a dangerous stranglehold on legal interpretations, aren't some kind of Macheavelian insurance policy. Post ipso facto, those not saved by presidential pardons, will get their walk from the SCOTUS. The final safety net for justice will instead become one for injustice.

[marions ghost]

64. interesting input...

a third suit pending eh? :thumbsdown:

In a country that believes it's all about legality, not morality--do you think that even if these settlements are brought out, that people would understand that she was part of an obviously sleezy operation, which SHOULD prevent someone from ascending to the highest court in the land?

Legal incompetence = do you actually believe this would disqualify anyone from the bar in Texas (or in many other states for that matter). I don't think so.

The legal system is messed up. Almost hopeless in deterring professional (white collar) crime at this point.

[DemFromMem]

73. reaching

You have drawn ever sinister conclusion possible. If you hold Miers to this standard, you're going to set up every nominee in the future - from a Democrat or a Republican - for failure.

Here's an analogy. Donna Shalala was a university president before being apppointed head of HHS. Universities get sued all the time for the misconduct of faculty members. Should a university president be barred from a presidential appointment because they are the manager of the university and bad conduct happened on their watch? When you run a major institution - and this law firm is one - the law of averages says you're going to get some bad apples. Of course you settle when you know you have a loser of a case. That's what a GOOD manager should do. And then take steps to make sure that the chances of the conduct being repeated are eliminated or reduced. Whether she did take these steps is something that may be worth exploring, though I'm not sure whether her ability to effectively manage a law firm is very relevant to her qualifications to sit on the court. I'm sure many great legal scholars are probably lousy managers.

My point was that Bush has the power - and I believe the right - to appoint a Scalia-type to the court. And he would probably win. We're not going to get a liberal justice and many people on this board will snipe at every nominee Bush names simply because they are not liberal. I'm just saying that of the people whose names were being floated, she is one that we might have a chance with becoming a Souter.

The White House is going to try and paint her as a loyal right wing strict constructionist, but that's spin. There is little evidence to support the contention that she really is that person.

[RaleighNCDUer]

68. She was also, supposedly, involved in the purging of *'s NG

records. Isn't destroying government property a crime? How does that sit with you?

[DemFromMem]

74. Indicting by blog

IF she did something illegal, you can bet every credible news organization in the US is investigating. Right now I've only seen some posts on a few blogs saying that she was involved in reviewing the records. But it's a major leap to say she committed a crime.

Nothing in this woman's record to date strikes me as showing that she has a character problem - quite the opposite. She seems to have had a strong commitment to pro bono causes - including taking on some unpopular but admirable matters. She apparently has a strong work ethic. She was willing to take some public and for the time progressive views on gay rights when she held public office.

I just tell folks to be careful what they wish for. If Miers is bounced, will you be happier when we get a Luttig or another ideologue?

[Mr_Scarecrow]

71. Further reality check

Was Michael Jackson guilty when he settled the first big suit years ago?

The reason most people settle a suit is because it will cost more in cash and goodwill and future profits to continue the suit, whether the defendant knows they are guilty or not.

You can't get Miers on someone alleging something - when a suit is settled, the records show "not guilty." There's no there there.

Another poster mentioned that when investors are defrauded, the lawsuits reach out to other parties including the defrauding company, which is absolutely true. If the accusing party doesn't do it themselves, then the defendant will do it. The typical players are law firms and accountants.

Unless Miers or her firm lost the case, then there's no basis for pushing this argument and the freepers will shut it down quick.

Personally I'm bothered by Harriet's extreme churchiness and childlessness and how those will play into her decisions.

[TheMadMonk]

75. Different circumstances.

MJ was is a highly public figure. He may or may not have been guilty. (Personal opinion smoke & fire.) However there is one thing we can be pretty certain of: due to his actions he might as well have tattooed: "Please charge/sue me for fucking little boys." on his forehead. Whether or not he did anything to those boys, he asked for the lawsuit.


But when is it most likely to cost more? When the case is unwinnable. More rarely is it a case of the case being unsustainable for reasons of publicity, the "victim" is just too mediagenic to trash, or the "perp" has too much to loose even if he wins.

IIRC, winning a case, generally doesn't cost much but time, since legal costs are generally awarded against the loser. Goodwill/Future costs? These would have to be very extensive and likely. After all, the Current Affairs programs are full of little old ladies and the like who are regularly screwed over with the help of a legal loophole and lawyer.

For a firm of lawyers, rolling over too quickly, is not going to endear them to existing and future clients. They want a lawyer that will fight for them tooth and nail. Mom's Pies need goodwill and image to survive. Lawyers need the same, but image for a lawyer is generally being the biggest, nastiest and most ruthless shark in the pool, not a sea cucumber that dumps its guts and hides until the heat is gone.

If it shows "Not guilty" that's wrong IMHO. It should read something "No Verdict Found" or "Not Proven" unless (even if) there is something else in the record to indicate that a settlement was reached.

One Ponzi scheme = a dirty client. Two (may)= stupid lawyers. Three, all connected by a common law firm = Who suggested what to whom?

Yes, victims go looking for deep pockets amongst those who may have aided/abetted their defrauders. In this case they found evidence damning enough that "Messers Dewie, Cheatem & Howe" decided to cough up immediately in two cases out of three. It would be interesting to know the difference that made them decide to fight in the third (New York) case. The evidence is less damning/more ambiguous? Or a friendlier legal environment?

I too am bothered by her churchiness and also probable attitude towards abortion. Most worrying though is her stated absolute personal loyalty to Scruby. Another SC justice who will rule as instructed rather than as required by the law is an unmittigatted disaster. Justices likely to take instruction from a party in opposition goes beyond disaster to a full blown catastrophe waiting to happen.

From what I understand it is virtually impossible to unseat a Justice once they have taken up their seat. An orchestrated campaign of constitutional challenges could quite possibly bring the govt. to a screeching halt.

It only has to last long enough to transfer a little mud from themselves to the new administration. Then a little finger pointing and decalim, "Look at their performance record."

[Callboy]

58. gee.....at least she is a woman...

nonsense

[appnzllr]

61. Maybe this isn't significant

My impression is that clients make it a practice of suing their law firm if they lose a case. There is probably a practice of suing law firms related to whether they over-billed their clients. I don't think this is conclusive. Jumping on something like this without having all the facts can lead to a lack of credibility.

[bejammin075]

63. Bush says her philosophy won't change

Hmmm...that's a plus?

[joytomme]

72. Co-managing partner

Miers was Co-Managing Partner at Locke, Liddell & Sapp. That's not really heading a firm. A co-managing partner is responsible for overseeing the management of the firm on a day-to-day basis. And the "co" part means she didn't do it alone, she was a part of a duo. As in, she was one of two offices managers.

She has, on an on-going basis, continually inflated her resume. The woman is a suck-up. But not a terribly important suck-up, just your garden-variety fuck-the-little-guy while screwing the big guy suck-up.

Joy Tomme

http://ratbangdiary.blogspot.com