County Benchs suborn perjury - San Diego County Bench sure did, and way more than two people witnessed it first hand, live. They the same thing in every single price economic (antitrust) class case brought by the players - the class players. The big money esquires. Especially the county bench brothel. And they, after giving big kick backs in county court ordered fees, it is not uncommon for these slick county judges to land a big paying job at one of their pals firms. Milberg illustrates. The new job landed by former New York Supreme Court Judge Herman Cahn has raised from eyebrows. Less than a year ago, Cahn awarded millions in fees to founding partner Melvin Weiss despite his guilty plea in a massive fraud case. The firm, once called Milberg Weiss, wanted to let Weiss keep the fees and it was Cahn who agreed to the payment. The federal government alleged a 30-year kickback scheme involving three partners Melvyn Weiss, David Bershad and Steven Schulman. Cahn’s ruling contradicted a general rule that law firms are barred from sharing legal fees with nonlawyers — Weiss was no longer a practicing lawyer. It was called The Milberg Double Cross at the time. The ruling allowed Weiss to potentially receive millions more than the money he forfeited as part of his criminal plea. ... See, these county-state judges get sucked into the politics and come to depend on their private pals for prestige, perks and payoffs. It comes at a dark price sometimes. They dont know when it starts, they learn as they go, just like District Attorneys. Its pitch black, back door stuff. Oh, and this is great - both the ABA and the State Bar made up their own little rule to keep all legal fees only to themselves, forbidding the practice of law and sharing of fees with non-members. It is a straight up price fixing gig, point blank. This is the California Bars little blip on money arrangements with non-lawyers, even though they do it all the time via mortgage contract gigs - thats where the real money is - money for nothing, every month. Oh, and they share those fees with Judges through other arrangements: Judge Herman Cahn has raised from eyebrows. Rule 1-320 Financial Arrangements With Non-Lawyers (A) Neither a member nor a law firm shall directly or indirectly share legal fees with a person who is not a lawyer, except that: (1) An agreement between a member and a law firm, partner, or associate may provide for the payment of money after the members death to the members estate or to one or more specified persons over a reasonable period of time; or (2) A member or law firm undertaking to complete unfinished legal business of a deceased member may pay to the estate of the deceased member or other person legally entitled thereto that proportion of the total compensation which fairly represents the services rendered by the deceased member; or (3) A member or law firm may include non-member employees in a compensation, profit-sharing, or retirement plan even though the plan is based in whole or in part on a profit-sharing arrangement, if such plan does not circumvent these rules or Business and professions Code section 6000 et seq.; or (4) A member may pay a prescribed registration, referral, or participation fee to a lawyer referral service established, sponsored, and operated in accordance with the State Bar of Californias Minimum Standards for a Lawyer Referral Service in California. (B) A member shall not compensate, give, or promise anything of value to any person or entity for the purpose of recommending or securing employment of the member or the members law firm by a client, or as a reward for having made a recommendation resulting in employment of the member or the members law firm by a client. A members offering of or giving a gift or gratuity to any person or entity having made a recommendation resulting in the employment of the member or the members law firm shall not of itself violate this rule, provided that the gift or gratuity was not offered or given in consideration of any promise, agreement, or understanding that such a gift or gratuity would be forthcoming or that referrals would be made or encouraged in the future. (C) A member shall not compensate, give, or promise anything of value to any representative of the press, radio, television, or other communication medium in anticipation of or in return for publicity of the member, the law firm, or any other member as such in a news item, but the incidental provision of food or beverage shall not of itself violate this rule. Discussion: Rule 1-320(C) is not intended to preclude compensation to the communications media in exchange for advertising the members or law firms availability for professional employment. jonathanturley.org/2009/02/25/revolving-door-judge-who-awarded-millions-to-milberg-law-firm-is-made-partner-at-firm/
Posted on: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 06:52:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015