• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Lawyers Allegedly Behaving Badly

I'm thinking that hiring a lawyer named "Cartel" might have been the first red flag

And now facing contempt charges; apparently, saying "my wife was responsible for the trust fund, and she's not able to testify" isn't the flex one might think it is. I suspect the judge was less enthusiastic about that claim when testimony that a line of credit expenditure was to repair a sewer backup was demonstrably false, and the funds instead were funnelled into the trust account to cover some of the fraudulent transactions.

 
And now facing contempt charges; apparently, saying "my wife was responsible for the trust fund, and she's not able to testify" isn't the flex one might think it is. I suspect the judge was less enthusiastic about that claim when testimony that a line of credit expenditure was to repair a sewer backup was demonstrably false, and the funds instead were funnelled into the trust account to cover some of the fraudulent transactions.

In cases like that there should be a criminal investigation and, if warranted, charges as well. Seems to be a pretty clear breach of trust and theft by conversion. It doesn’t sound like a super complex investigation; some victim/witness statements and a couple rounds of production orders would probably do it, so long as the law society was willing to play ball on working through the privilege issues.
 
Self regulation or self protection?

The self-protection, 'circling the wagons' is not limited to law societies. Many other professional regulatory bodies, teachers and doctors in Ontario, come under similar fire.

The one point I will quibble with is the claim that mispronouncing someone's name is microaggression and a go-to ground for disrespect and discrimination. Heck, my surname is Scottish is is mispronounced more often than said correctly. Heck, I've even been told how it should be pronounced (incorrectly). I guess because I'm not a visible minority it doesn't matter.
 
The self-protection, 'circling the wagons' is not limited to law societies. Many other professional regulatory bodies, teachers and doctors in Ontario, come under similar fire.

The one point I will quibble with is the claim that mispronouncing someone's name is microaggression and a go-to ground for disrespect and discrimination. Heck, my surname is Scottish is is mispronounced more often than said correctly. Heck, I've even been told how it should be pronounced (incorrectly). I guess because I'm not a visible minority it doesn't matter.
Ditto. If I had a nickel for every time my name is mispronounced... With the exception of the "highly private information" that seemed to have come out that no one seemed to notice (which makes you wonder what it was - and it still might have been relevant to the case) this isn't much of an article of earth-shattering dimensions. Seems the reporter was just fluffing out the piece.

I've mentioned before that I've been a bencher in Manitoba for eight years and sat on complaints investigation or discipline or reimbursement for all of those. There is a tremendous financial cost on the law society in both actual money spent and volunteer time of lawyers who could otherwise be earning $3-500 an hour. Penalties are high especially when the costs of administering the hearing (which can be in the tens of thousands) are placed on the lawyer. When it comes to reimbursement, law societies pay out millions to defrauded individuals insurance rates for professional negligence.

I know people want to whine about self-discipline but, quite frankly, its a burden on the good lawyers doing it and most of the time it works more expeditiously then similar government agencies - ever go through a civil rights tribunal? or the courts?

🍻
 
Canada wide arrest warrant.


And license suspended.

 
Well, a judge, not a lawyer. And a judge who never was a lawyer, at that.

Huh. I just went down a brief “New York Village and Town Court” rabbit hole. They do a lot of what our Justices of the Peace (also not usually lawyers) do, but sounds like they also fill in other judicial roles that overlap legally trained judges in some criminal and family law matters. Pretty extensive scope for a lay bench.
 
Chatty lawyer here...

A lawyer used ChatGPT to cite bogus cases. What are the ethics?​


A New York lawyer is facing potential sanctions over an error-riddled brief he drafted with help from ChatGPT.

It's a scenario legal ethics experts have warned about since ChatGPT burst onto the scene in November, marking a new era for AI that can produce human-like responses based on vast amounts of data.

Steven Schwartz of Levidow, Levidow & Oberman faces a June 8 sanctions hearing before U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel after he admitted to using ChatGPT for a brief in his client's personal injury case against Avianca Airlines. The brief cited six non-existent court decisions.

 
This story seems to fit since the Spirit Warrior was suspended by the LSO so they must have been at least a paralegal.

I don't know about behaving "badly", but "batshit crazy" might have been a term that was used.

The Law Society Tribunal - Hearing Division determined that, by reason of physical or mental illness or other infirmity, Glenn Patrick Bogue (the Respondent),is and has been incapacitated within the meaning of section 37 of the Law Society Act, in that he is and has been incapable of meeting his obligations as a licensee
On February 10, 2020, the Law Society Tribunal - Hearing Division ordered that:
(1) The Respondent 's licence to practise law is suspended commencing immediately and continuing indefinitely until all of the following conditions have been met:
a. the Respondent is examined by a physician registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (or with the equivalent regulatory body in another Canadian territory or province) certified as a psychiatrist
by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada ( the examining psychiatrist ); and
b. the Respondent provides a written report by the examining psychiatrist confirming, to the satisfaction of the Law Society 's Executive Director, Professional Regulation or her designate ( the Executive Director ), that the Respondent is no longer incapacitated within the meaning of section 37 of the Law Society Act.
(2) The written report referenced in paragraph 1(b) must also confirm that:
a. the examining psychiatrist has reviewed and considered the written reasons relating to this proceeding and the psychiatric assessment report of Dr. Philip E. Klassen dated November 29, 2018 concerning the Respondent;
b. the Respondent has met with a physician registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (or with the equivalent regulatory body in another Canadian territory or province) certified as a psychiatrist by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada ( the treating psychiatrist ) for treatment for his condition at a minimum frequency of once per month for a minimum period of six consecutive months; and
c. the Respondent has followed the treating psychiatrist 's treatment plan for a minimum period of six consecutive months and continues to follow the treatment plan.
(3) While his licence is suspended, the Respondent shall fully comply with the terms of the Law Society' s Guidelines for Lawyers Who Are Suspended or Who Have Given an Undertaking Not to Practise.
(4) Following the termination of the suspension set out in paragraph 1:
a. the Respondent may only practise law as an employee of a lawyer with a licence in good standing who has been approved by the Executive Director and who has reviewed this order, the written reasons relating to this proceeding, and the report of Dr. Klassen ( the employer ), and the Respondent shall be directly supervised by the employer in practising law;
b. the Respondent may not operate a trust account in connection with his law practice;
c. the Respondent shall meet with the treating psychiatrist at least once every three months;
d. the Respondent shall comply with all mental health treatment as recommended by the treating psychiatrist; and
e. every three months, the Respondent shall provide to the Executive Director a letter from the treating psychiatrist reporting on the Respondent 's condition(s), symptom(s), prescribed treatment, compliance with treatment and prognosis.
(5) If the Respondent provides a written report from a physician registered with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario (or with the equivalent regulatory body in another Canadian territory or province) certified as a psychiatrist by the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada that satisfies the Executive Director that the restrictions and requirements set out in paragraph 4 are no longer required to protect the public or the public interest, then the restrictions and requirements set out in paragraph 4 may be lifted or varied with the written authorization of the Executive Director.
(6) There is no order as to costs.

And some of his interaction with the LSO

 
Last edited:
I don't know about behaving "badly", but "batshit crazy" might have been a term that was used.



And some of his interaction with the LSO

Interesting that one of the panel members is Rocco Galati, himself a 'piece of work'.
 
Back
Top