If the lawyer's independent legal advice to the client was interfered with, it is a violation of the rule, period. /2
-
-
It could also, depending on state law, be champerty or maintenance, and there are articles already looking at that. /3
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
At the very least, the dropping of the insured claims raises an inference that ought to be the subject of discovery. /4
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @billiecat @HeerJeet
No, it doesn't. How does that or any tactical choice give rise to an inference the lawyer's judgement was compromised?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
A "tactical choice" that prolongs litigation is for the gain of a party not the client is clearly suspect. You a lawyer?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @billiecat @HeerJeet
Also, public interest litigation involves this stuff all the time. Why no problem there? 2/2
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
public interest litigation is not a secret agreement not disclosed to the court. And even there problems can arise.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @billiecat @HeerJeet
The court isn't privy to the details of the public interest firms agenda. Just their PR. And yeah, it can be bad.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @tznkai @billiecat
Agenda doesn't matter. Their behavior is public & they can be held accountable for cases they support, unlike Thiel
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet @billiecat
The court is not responsible for keeping rich people "accountable" to the public via press scrutiny.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
In point of fact, legal system can and has set rules for champerty
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet @billiecat
... which is not about the press, but the court.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.