Disposable People - July 08, 2008 Memory Lane....

Here is a case of the court's diligence, the participant is a trustee assigned by the courts to address my girlfriends bankruptcy, her fourth attorney and the third attorney.

Now the fourth attorney had my girlfriend file bankruptcy to get out of the suit and tried to charge the third attorney with malpractice. Throughout this period the fourth attorney had stated that prior counsel had not done their job and that the husbands attorney was unethical.

At the time of the meeting with trustee my girlfriend had the fourth attorney telling her about the mistakes made by prior counsel but not providing details and our memory of the meeting with the third attorney when they informed us about the suit against us. To this day in that meeting room with the third attorney stands out vividly, over two years after the incident we knew that the date of the event did not occur on the date in the police report, we knew this, because the calls were made as a result of my girlfriend spending several hours begging for a visitation with her son to see him on his birthday in August, the charges were made in September 1989. I mentioned this several times in that meeting with third attorney, one time he was walking out of the room. I even mentioned that the second attorney would have note of it, he handled the criminal charges. Yet, according to the trustee because the third attorney did not make note of our questioning the date he was diligent. What about the complaints that our fourth attorney was making, here was a professional claiming unethical conduct for one and negligence to malpractice for the other. The trustee's report only mentioned conversation with the fourth attorney, was this professional dismissed ? why no mention of their allegations ?

Another point of interest was that the husbands attorney showed up to the bankruptcy hearing as a friend of the court, was there collaboration between the trustee and the husbands attorney also ? I make this claim because after the wait period no creditor had made a claim, fourth attorney had confirmed this, a week later we were informed that the claim had been put in, guess some are privileged in the eyes of the courts.

The third attorney by not listening to me when I questioned the date of the event, this strategy of not listenting exposed their client to the suit. How much more did this attorney bury ? Remember we had hired ourselves a "professional". After our fourth attorney dropped their "abuse of process" action we went to the archives, memory lane and discovered the depths of betrayal by this member of the Virginia State Bar - it is all in the "Strategy". These are all "strategy" issues the husbands attorney used their tactics to leverage their cause. The third attorney was either "distracted" or leveraged their position in a political agenda. Just why did the fourth attorney drop their "abuse of process" ? So with the Virginia State Bar's changed from here today to gone tomorrow allowing them to dismiss "strategy", this is what they are dismissing.

You may ask one more question, why didnt we address this back in 1995. Well we were getting road blocks after the fourth attorney dropped their "abuse of process", the psychiatrist they had us see and ourselves were in a quandary. This ended when my girlfriend was bitten by a dog, this attorney was supposed to address this issue when they finished with the injury case, one thing at a time they told us, five years pass and they desert and the Virginia State Bar changes their policy here today to gone tomorrow - say goodbye to "diligence", "integrity", "propriety" and "competence"......Especially if one is a Probono client.....
Contents   Talk   Blog's