Vanishing Attorneys of Virginia

Fun with a Legal Newsgroup




My Rant that started it all.
JB Casper tells me how stupid I am.
JB Casper responds to my E-mail.
JB Casper expresses interest.
I respond to JB Casper's claimed interest.
Silence of the Void - JB Casper fails to respond, attorney SOP.
I am a "prat" - cool, name calling, is this a professional ?
Still Waiting
Observed Events
Experiences of Others
Conclusions
What is a RICO entity ?
Tantrum
Legal services by the gram - the true use for the scales held by Lady Justice.


Here we decided to see what the resposes to our positions would be in cyber-space. This page contains dialog from a post on "alt.lawyers.sue.sue.sue", the subject was "Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia".

From: scotter8@my-deja.com
Subject: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Friday, June 16, 2000 6:04 AM

Hey,

After a decade and five attorneys that highlight our dealings with the farce of the Virginia Judicial System our current attorney vanishes - Washington Post articles: Washington Post Article A41405-2000Jun1.html and Washington Post Article A32933-2000Jun10.html

We have had a Virginia Attorney on a crusade against us.
A Virginia Attorney that allowed us to be stepped on, slandered, records accessed the end result was that we lost the case.
Another Virginia attorney took us on with the burdon of the "loser" Attorney's mistakes, managed to acquire the Settlement - but took the settlement for their own in the process, leaving us with the impression and instructions for us to do as we waited to file "Abuse of Process" charges against the crusading Attorney - this attorney "forgot" about us when we called them at the end of the wait.

Then a "dog bite" unwilling to trust these DAMN VIRGINIA ATTORNEY'S & the VIRGINIA COURTS. We reluctantly trusted this one - Highly recommended by other attorneys. Only he decides to drop all his clients.... The Virginia State Bar just says "find another attorney", yeah right, what will be their price another 10 years and money to finance their trips to the Bahamas.
People wonder why others feel insecure, the need to obtain "protection".

Disgusted
From: JB Caspernolo@execpc.com
Subject: Re: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Friday, June 16, 2000 7:51 AM

If this rant-like, nearly unintelligible post is any indication, and I suspect it is, then it is amazing you were even able to locate an attorney in the first place and complete a call to set up an appointment, let alone articulate a claim which would result in a favorable settlement or trial victory. What in hell are you whining about, anyway?

From: scotter8@my-deja.com
Subject: Re: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Friday, June 16, 2000 11:01 AM

I guess the Washington Post is "unintelligible" also, or you are computer illiterate. Guess I could go into details on each individual Attorney and the manner in which they F&*(ED UP. But the details on their mess up's is irrelevant, just that they did. Or, I can take your post to mean that STUPID people are not allowed to have representation - think that is called discrimination. Go Flame someone else - oh Post WHINER....


I had intended to have this discussion continue in the forum, but I clicked on the wrong return and it was sent directly to JB Casper himself. I was startled by a response from him.

From: scotter8@my-deja.com
To: JB Casper nolo@execpc.com
Subject: Re: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Friday, June 16, 2000 6:28 PM

Hey JB Casper,

I was going to let this response drop with my last post but it seems to support my position regarding the attitude of Attorney's that we have had our displeasure to run across. Rather than addressing the issue that was presented "that here is an individual that is obviously having problems with obtaining counsel" - for whatever reason, JB decided to attack me as a "ranting" individual who is so incompetent that I should just roll over and die.

It is not the fact that my attorney was documented in the Washington Post, I believe that it is a reputable "intelligible" newspaper, for deserting his clients of which I was one. It was not the fact that I had been addressing that issue for five years and that before that I had lost a small fortune because my representation just omitted to present material supporting my position, leaving me in a financial bind. That now I am again exposed to creditors and have to communicate the issues to another attorney that, from past experience may not look out for my - THE CLIENT'S best interests.

This person chose to attack me as a ranting fool. But when he states that because I may not be able to communicate at his level I should not be represented - so because I am a STUPID, POOR, MORON I should not be represented. Where does this stop, maybe because of my RACE - BLACK, HISPANIC I should not be represented, maybe because of my SEXUAL PREFERENCE - GAY or STRAIGHT I do not have the right to legal representation. Maybe because I am not a member of a preferred group CLAN, PANTHERS, NAZI'S I should not be represented.

oooooopssss - I am RANTING again....... tsk tsk on me......

JB do you read English or is Latin the only language that you know ?


This return startled me. I like the "Public Utility" comment, at least with a Public Utility I have some expectation of service. In the business environment, I will never be able to compete with the likes of Al Capone for legal representation. So like in days past, defensive / offensive mechanisms belong with the strong - financial or physical strength there is no difference. I also like the "supposed" to be "professionals" statement.

From: JB Casper <nolo@execpc.com>
To: <scotter8@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Friday, June 16, 2000 7:13 PM

I have read much of what you have posted, and, quite simply, I still don't know what you're saying, and, yes, I both speak and read English. I had and have no idea what your race, religion, ethnic origin, political or sexual orientation may be, and that has nothing to do with anything. I just think that if you had the misfortune of one attorney "running out" on you and other clients, that's definitely too damned bad, but when you say, or imply, that it is impossible to find an ethical and competent attorney at all, then I suspect it is a problem with you, not with the bar. If you'd like to explain to me what legal claim(s) or objective(s) which you are pursuing, or with regard to which you seek redress, and what obstacles attorneys have posed to you with respect to same, I'd be interested in hearing it. Attorneys are supposed to be professionals and are supposed to be interested in seeking the reasonable and proper legal objectives of their clients, and most do; however, sometimes the client's goals, objectives or expectations are not reasonable, but, in any event, attorneys do perform their services, just as most everyone else, for compensation and, of course, they're interested in being justly compensated, do you have some problem with that - do you think attorneys are some form of public utility?

In hopes that this individual was sincere with the comment "If you'd like to explain to me what legal claim(s) or objective(s) which you are pursuing, or with regard to which you seek redress, and what obstacles attorneys have posed to you with respect to same, I'd be interested in hearing it". I sent the following to his e-mail address, as you can tell it was sent June 18, 2000.

From: To: JB Casper nolo@execpc.com
Subject: Re: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Sunday, June 18, 2000 6:11 PM

JB,

Interesting, first you post judgments without knowledge of the situations that resulted in the post in the first place. Lets see if I can encapsulated 10 years of dealing with the Virginia Judicial System without "ranting". As if it really matters because you are not in a position to "do" anything about any situation.

History, I met my girlfriend after she had separated from her "ex", who was abusive. Her "ex" was also a stalker, the family that my girl friend had escaped to had filed restraining orders on him. About two years before my girlfriend separated from him she had sought counseling from Social Services, this continued after I had met her. Her ex had denied her family, social contacts, employment and driving.

First Attorney - went into corporate law, he ensured that my girlfriend was represented. Recommending Attorney #2.
Second Attorney - started off strong, but when he discovered that the case was going to take a little while cited that he had a heavy case load and could not represent her.

--------- The above two attorneys were not "bad" they just did not complete the job ---------

The second attorney did not provide/recommend representation which exposed my girlfriend to a hearing without representation. In this hearing Her ex's attorney started off with fictitious events and incidents - I attempted to address the court, which resulted in a separate hearing. The end result was not good, the court listened to their side, of which was a phone tape. After hearing their side, the Judge asked if we had anything to say, we had pictures, social services records and stalking incidents to present but before we could present it the Judge said that he had heard enough. This resulted in a shouting match between the Judge and myself - I was of the misconception that both sides needed to be heard before a Judgement could be made. The judge then denied my girlfriend contact with her minor son, this ruling could not be overturned - other Judges would say that they "would not go against another Judges ruling".

Third Attorney - at the time we believed that he was playing his cards close to his vest. At the hearings the ex's attorney would say slanderous things, the Judges would stop the court and state that he was committing slander, our attorney dismissed it, telling us that it was "professional courtesy". Before the Divorce trial date my girlfriend received a phone call from her Mental Health Counselor stating that the courts had ordered her to give up her files. My girlfriend called her attorney, who then did a "Motion to Quash", the courts allowed the records to be accessed. We had accepted the access of "confidential" records until we went to the archives and discovered that the records accessed started a year after the separation, a note by the ruling Judge documented the period - something that her attorney should have caught. Her ex's attorney paraded members of the church through the courts who would state that he was "born again", should be forgiven.... My girlfriends attorney did not present "all the records" records that documented the trauma of separation, did not present the friends or acquaintances that had witnessed her ex's assaults. Her ex was awarded the divorce based on my girlfriends infidelity - proof of which was obtained from the records that dated a year after the separation. The standard half community property settlement was the result. Delays and more delays, unable to pay the child support demanded by the courts my girlfriend went to jail. Her attorney left her there, this required retaining a fourth attorney who got her out.

Fourth Attorney - extracted my girlfriend from jail and set about attempting to obtain the awarded settlement. Again delays upon delays, the courts would not hear of awarding her legal fees to the opposition. In this manner the settlement was drained, this individual desperately needed something to get started with. This attorney stated that they were cleaning up the mess of the prior attorney, they were very upset. The settlement was finally awarded but it cost the settlement to get to that point. After the settlement was awarded the ex's attorney decided to open up a civil suit against us. During this period this attorney had stated that we should have a good case of "Abuse of Process" against the ex's attorney. After the ex's attorney dropped the suit, our attorney stated something's to do if we wanted to press an "Abuse of Process" charge against the attorney and to get in touch in about six months. Left with nothing we complied with the instructions and waited for six months. We called them and discovered that they had forgotten about the "Abuse of Process" issue, since we had not received any billing information and since I had prepaid for a legal situation that had not occurred I asked about that - a shouting match on the phone ensued, March 1995. Frustrated and deserted we continued to see the Psychologist that the attorney had ordered us to see, to support the "Abuse of Process" charge, we were considering dropping the whole mess.....

Fifth Attorney - May 1995, my girlfriend was walking in the neighborhood when a dog bit her. The insurance company was contacted and then they lost their client. When this attorney failed to respond we were concerned about another situation like when the third attorney left my girlfriend in jail or the fouth attorney forgot to close our case / address the "Abuse of Process" issue. So we contacted the State Bar. We actually liked this attorney, my girlfriend had total trust in him, but the years dragged by. He had expressed frustration in the loophole that the Insurance company had found to delay resolution. We were hoping that he would take it to the next level and finish with the bantering.

Guess you could call that a light summation of our experiences with attorneys.


Combined with our experiences we also have "attorney" experiences of individuals within our circle. These people are not us, there is also a doctor who has witnessed other impropriaties within the courts.

1) A recent friend is attempting a divorce, the first attorney didnt file the right papers in time. This forced them to obtain other counsel. However since the first attorney had taken their money they had nothing to retain the other attorney - communication did not work, they were forced to contact the Bar.
2) A relative obtained a divorce or so they thought until they discovered that the attorney had not bothered to file the papers.
3) When we mention the name of the Judge that didnt listen to our presentation others have informed us that he is unfair, some have went as far as to say that he is corrupt - do you want names ?

So, we have our files and the Bar discarded us to this Attorney Crap Shoot again. Looking at the odds they do not look good. I would have a better chance hiring an army to resolve my issues. What I am saying is that apparently Attorney's now days are not looking out for their clients best interests, they seek profit.

a) My girlfriend had expected the settlement awarded, had accepted the courts ruling in her ex's favor to get past the point.
b) My girlfriend had expected a settlement on the dog bite since it immobilized her for over a year and made it impossible to obtain employment where she had been qualified.
c) When we had been told by our attorney that we had an "Abuse of Process" claim we believed them.
d) We would like to see some type of Service warranty card on the "Services" that these "professionals" are supposed to provide. After the divorce was lost it was too late, the Civil Courts discounted her need for the resources, resulting in her being jailed.
e) The Bar's requirement that they cannot take action until after a Civil Court action creates a paradox. We were financially destroyed by the actions / inaction's of attorneys. We did not have the financial means to obtain counsel to present an action in the Civil Courts. All attorneys contacted cited a minimum of $10,000 retainer, something that we could not afford - that was without the "ranting".
f) It would have been nice to have found an attorney that would have reviewed our issues on the "Abuse of Process" charge and possibly taken it on Pro-Bono. This would have protected your industry and future victims from a crusading attorney.

These objectives / expectations were not unreasonable.

When my father retired from the practice twenty or so years ago he expressed disdain for the current implementation of the field. He believed that facts no longer mattered, that lies or image had become the foundation of the profession. Now I guess I have to agree, the industry is contaminated.

Well it is now July 11, 2000 and JB Casper has yet to respond. Maybe there were too many details, maybe I did not word it "correctly" or maybe this JB Casper is just a bufoon, a poser.

The following is cute, this guy makes up words.....
I admit to having problems with writing, language, spelling and what not. But if someone is going to call me stupid, tell me that because I lack "something" I should be denied a service, they should at least spell "intelligable" correctly ("intelligible").

From: Ary ary@2k.btinternet.com
Subject: Re: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Saturday, June 17, 2000 8:00 PM

On Fri, 16 Jun 2000 15:01:10 GMT, scotter8@my-deja.com wrote: Actually you are the prat, he is quite right in saying post something intelligable ... i.e. something which makes sense. *plonk >>>killfile*

From: scotter8@my-deja.com
Subject: Re: Vanishing Attorney's of Virginia
Date: Monday, June 19, 2000 8:37 AM
Hey Ary,

Being the "Prat" that I am - where does that term come from ? Interesting also the word "intelligable" in a comment on my lack of intelligence - spell checker anyone.

I enjoy kicking a dead horse for the sound that it makes so.... Again someone comments on my "ranting", an attack on my character, without knowledge of the facts supporting my "rant". Since these individuals cannot "prove" that we do not have a case they attack these statements as rantings by a radical, they attack the individuals character in an attempt to support their own self aggrandizement. Knowing full well that if the details supporting the issues were released that would expose the individual to the potential of defending themselves against a liable charge.

Over the past decade I/we can point to five attorneys and state that they either became too busy to finish our issues, did not perform competently, that they left us with the presumption and instructions for future actions or they just vanished. We retained these individuals, we had communicated our issues to them, they had stated that they could handle the cases and we have documented proof of their inconsistencies. This poor service is not an anomaly, we accepted that excuse for the first three attorneys. Our fourth attorney was so upset with the actions of the opposition that they stated that we had an "Abuse of Process" case against this attorney. This made our "total" questionable experiences with attorneys six. We were informed of actions to take to support such a case, at which time the fourth left us believing that after a proscribed wait we could take action. Within our circle of acquaintances we know of several other incidents, where an attorney failed to complete their mission, from our website we have heard a multitude of similar horror stories.

The difference from being a "victim" of the Judicial System and a natural catastrophe is that with the Judicial System an individual is isolated, alone. A natural catastrophe takes property and life, however if it is survived people can get together, support each other and re-build. The Judicial System destroys social connections, resources, property and health. By "victim" I mean someone that is innocent of a crime or trying to escape from a abusive environment, only to be persecuted and victimized by an unjust, unfair, implementation of Process. Using your "ranting" logic I can go up to a disaster survivor or a victim of violence that is complaining about their experience and say quit your whining, stop ranting. Unlike a physical disaster, victimization by the Judicial System's implementation leaves deep psychological scars, ranging from the children that are exposed to years of legal disputes or abuse, to isolation and depression imposed on the adults.

One reason for these posts is exposure, to warn individuals that just because they retained an attorney their problems may not be solved. That the lack of a solution may not be because the individual is "guilty" of a crime or that they were incorrect. Rather that the attorney may make a series of obvious "mistakes", resulting in the loss of an issue. That the attorney's motives may not be purely professional, as in payment for service, obtaining payment through their skills. We learned the details of our "mishaps" when we went to the archives, having absorbed the damage.

Second reason is to expose the Civil Court solution to Legal Malpractice, we were financially destroyed by the actions of these attorneys. Our attorney at the time stated that we had an "Abuse of Process" issue, when they dropped us, we attempted to obtain counsel. In these attempts when we mentioned that we needed to address a Legal Malpractice issue the retainer was beyond our means - an attorney that had warranted another attorney to state that we had an issue with their use of Process walked. I believe that "Abuse of Process" is an ethical issue. The System uses financial barriers to protect their membership. Third reason was that again we were experiencing the frustration of losing legal representation in the middle of a case. We had been told by counsel to hold off of the prior issues until the recent issue was resolved - five years past. We were having problems contacting our counsel, we then wrote to the State Bar, our counsel disappeared apparently having absconded with their clients settlements. Being passed around by five attorneys and attacked by a sixth unleashed this "rant". A total distrust of the profession and going through the crap shoot for an attorney does not present good odds at resolving our issues this is demonstrated by our past experiences.

Of course since you seem to like being able to complain about "ranting" individuals, you can read this. Lets follow the money trail. In the early 1900's there was something called Prohibition, this activity provided a channel for individuals to accumulate immense wealth through violent or illicit means. With this wealth they could buy politicians, attorneys, law enforcement officers and weapons. Prohibition ended to be replaced by the "Drug War" again we see violent turf disputes, high dollar weapons on the street and impure product. In my younger days, I hung out with a rough crowd, one guy had just gotten out of jail, I asked him why, that the whole business was crazy. He smiled and said "it is just a game", he then pulled out a roll of cash, about $1000 and stated that was one day's business. Looking back on that incident, seeing what I see on the streets and what we have experienced - I follow the money. Business men like this guy have the money to pay the attorneys and others to get them off - profit is good, clients like this guy have the money to pay the attorneys plus extra. Now comes average citizen attempting to make ends meet, legally, he approaches the attorney to address a legal matter, this client is not profitable. When this legal guy complains of poor service it is stated that he is "ranting".

Our situation is a symptom of a much larger problem, we have gone beyond the "anomaly" phase of the issue. Individuals "fed" by the current implementation of Process will vehemently deny any problem - acceptance would be poor business. Since the Bar consists of attorneys to go against the flow would not profit their industry, the larger the membership the larger the financial base. To censor attorneys that skim their clients (skimming - attorney takes the case, forces a retainer, then does a substandard service, requiring the client to change attorneys or lose the case skimming the retainer or a portion thereof) or bar them from practicing would damage profits - bad for business.


I gave up waiting for JB Casper to respond so I posted the following on-line. It is very interesting how these people, the posters and attorneys seem to avoid dialog on issues close to them. They will go on and on about how "YOU" messed up or how messed up "SOMEONEELSE" is but don't confront them on their own inadequacies - it becomes the silence of the void. These people avoid problems within their industry and themselves. The personality types that seem to be attracted to the legal professions are judgmental, prejudiced, close minded, selfish and they seek power over others. This profile may be sufficient in the business community, however to have these individuals in positions of judgement or representing victims of situations is a scary proposition.

As always these people whine about the bottom line "profit" at this time the question comes about is "who is more profitable Al Capone or a victim of abuse ?" Business is Business and by definition the industry must support its primary customer base. This customer base is not "law abiding citizens", they do not provide revenue for the industry - this is being changed with their increasing complexity of the "rules" we are supposed to live by. It is to be noted that these rules do not apply to them. Regardless of enhancements to the system to provide further revenue for the industry, we (lower & middle class citizens) are not profitable to the majority of the industry.

Interesting - The best defense against logic is ignorance... I responded to the e-mail above, off-line, in my e-mail I addressed the issues with each of the attorneys that we had retained. This was about two weeks ago there has been no response. This lack of response implies the following:

a) Too busy (the only acceptable explanation - note later posts again attacking other posters).
b) Too busy to address issues, the individuals responding to these posting can only address postings that they consider "rants".
c) They believe that we don't have any issues and don't want to continue with a dialog since it has now become a subject of perceptions.
d) They believe that we do have issues but decline to address a dialog since the subject matter addresses peer competency - they must protect their own.

This response is indicative of the personalities attracted to the profession labeled "Attorneys". The first response is an attack on the character of the individual, it does not matter what the issue is, and if a subject is not explained in a manner that they accept, it is considered a "rant". I elicited this response with my first several postings. The second response is "you are wrong", it is not whether the subject is a valid issue and how to address it - we see this in attorney tactics, it is not the "fact" of right, wrong or resolving an issue it is the "illusion". Obviously winning an "illusion" is more profitable than resolving a dispute fairly. The third response is avoidance, the realization that maybe they are incorrect or that addressing an issue would take too much time and would not be profitable - the longer the delay the greater the profit on hourly charges.

The primary reason for my original postings was to see what responses would be on the subject of negligent and incompetent Attorneys, the personalities of individuals attracted to this newsgroup and in what manner is the profession regulated. A secondary goal was to light a fire under someone, maybe find an attorney that would and could address our issues against other attorney's - an attorney that actually believed in ethical responsibility within the profession. We now know that an attack on the profession elicits an avoidance approach to a problem - a human response but not a professional one. This secondary goal has been delegated to the "Crap Shoot" of the phone book - or - to be discarded given the injury / vanishing attorney issue.

Observations based on our experiences with the profession:

  • The most damaging situation occurred with a divorce issue, the only payment available was from the settlement and a $500 retainer. When it was apparent that the case was gaining complexity as a result of Ex's counsel, retained counsel participated minimally - at the hearings the losses were discounted as strategy. When a Judge commented that we were being slandered, this attorney dismissed it with a "professional curtesy" comment. When the trial occurred it was apparent that it was not strategy. The case was not easy and appeared not to be profitable, so rather than handle it diligently and possibly represent the client, defending the client became secondary. We heard that the attorney representing the case was running for some county political office at this time.


  • To obtain the awarded settlement and get out of jail for non-payment of Child Support it required another attorney. This attorney took all of the settlement - the courts did not award fees to the Ex for the delays. Since this was in the Civil Courts they may have taken this stance as a result of the loss from the first attorney's mistakes / omissions. This next attorney won the settlement for themselves and left us stating that after six months we could address an "Abuse of Process" issue against the ex's attorney, we were given instructions on what to do in the interim. With the illusion of a goal this attorney left us and proceeded to forget about the issue. No bill was presented, no conclusion was implied at this time - the client was discarded and forgotten about.


  • New issue, "dog bite", the attorney took on this case was highly recommended by others that we had contacted. Being financially destroyed by prior issues this attorney accepted the case pro-bono. When we broached the outstanding "Abuse of Process" issue this attorney told us to wait until the injury issue was resolved. Unfortunately the insurance companies' client disappeared on them - the case extended for five years. After about four years the attorney started our ignoring calls, this attorney has vanished.


  • Two attorneys retained in the very beginning, ducked out early when they discovered the complexity of the divorce case. One of these was ethical, he stated his reasons (a change from domestic law to corporate) he then found alternate counsel to continue with the issue. The second one just dropped his client stating heavy caseload, no effort was made to obtain alternate counsel and this resulted in facing a hearing without representation. We can consider the results here ethical, they are mentioned because these attorneys did not provide solutions.


  • When we attempted to obtain other counsel to address the "Abuse of Process" issue several attorneys quoted us a minimal retainer of $10K. This amount was way out of scope since prior court actions and the economy of the time had financially destroyed us. At that time we were basing our case on what our prior attorney had initiated and how we felt - we were depending on "professionals" to fill in the details. Maybe "Abuse of Process" is different from "Legal Malpractice", either way as a result of phone conversations the attorneys contacted cited amounts that were way out of scope of our finances.


  • After the "dog bite" injury and a yelling match between myself and the attorney that had started the "Abuse of Process" action, we went to the County Archives. There we discovered the mistakes and omissions that our counsels had made, notably counsel mentioned in item #1. The obvious documented mistake was when the ex's attorney obtained medical records out of context. The records obtained started a year after the separation, documented by the Judge hearing a motion to Quash. The records were obtained to address the divorce issue. The client initiated the motion to Quash after the doctor called the client stating that the sheriff was accessing their records. Counsel was prodded to do "something" so they filed a motion to Quash, however they overlooked the period. Even after the records had been obtained this counsel did not bother to try to use all the records to defend their client. This attorney omitted all the records, counselors and witnesses when the case came to trial - the case was lost because of the client's which infidelity was documented in records dating a year after the separation. This loss may have prejudiced the Civil Courts when they denied awarding fees because of delays initiated by ex and their counsel. Before the visit to the Archives the assumption was that all the records spanning before, during and after the separation had been accessed. These records were made by Social Services, they spanned two years prior to and three years following the separation. These records documented the abuses that had been suffered, even a time when the ex threatened to sue for interference. These records if used in their entirety may have altered the outcome of the case and issues that followed the case.


  • Observations of other individuals experience with Virginia attorneys and related industry.
    • Relative, was getting a divorce, they thought that it was completed only to discover several months later that the attorney never filed the papers - oops you are still married.


    • Acquaintance, is in the process of getting a divorce. They retained a Virginia Attorney, this attorney missed filing several papers. This dereliction required that they find other counsel. Unfortunately they had paid this attorney all of their savings. After a letter to the Bar the attorney paid them a portion of what they had paid - skimming money for minimal service. In a "real" profession if a task is not completed competently money paid can / is usually refunded. This individual accepted the amount not because it was "right" but because they needed to get on with their primary issue.


    • Several years ago someone from Hungary went to the Prosecuting Attorney's office to file charges against another for cutting their tires. This guy was astounded at the attitude in the office. He said that he walked in noticing that the people who were waiting, laughing and joking about the law and their exploits. When he told them that he was filing charges they shut up.



Enough of events that form the foundation of experiences with Virginia counsel. The ex's attorney was on a crusade, he was using the courts to punish those that he believed were sinners - we can provide witnesses for this perspective. This makes a total of six Virginia attorneys. I focus on Virginia Attorneys because they are the foundation of our issues. From a group of five Virginia attorneys retained, only one acted "ethically" and that was when they stated that they could not handle the case and ensured that alternate counsel was provided. These attorneys or their firms were selected based on recommendations and searching the phone book. Based on our experiences we believe that the odds of obtaining competent, ethical counsel using minimal resources in Virginia are not good.

Conclusions based on our observations:
  • Competent Jurisprudence is denied to certain financial classes - the institution is unethical.


  • Business ethics, there is no way that I can compete with individuals dealing in illicit commodities or someone that commits a high profile crime. Individually the average citizen is not profitable for an attorney, only in volume will an attorney profit. The less service provided per hour the greater profit - theft is more profitable than development. JB Casper is correct in his statement questioning a perception of attorneys as some form of "public utility". They are not a "public utility". With a "public utility" I have a certain expectation of service, there is a functional channel to address issues of non-service. When "real" professionals are retained, we the client, do not need to have intimate knowledge of the industry - for example when I hire an electrician I do not need an intimate knowledge of wiring, materials or industry standard. I have no expectation of truly professional service from an attorney, neither is there a functional channel to address non-service. The Al Capone's of this world will always be more profitable than I will be, so will the OJ's and Dahmers. Marketing demands either volume or content - service is the casualty.


  • Other industries are regulated by the Civil mechanism, for example the injury and an insurance company attracted our vanishing attorney. After ten years we broke down and wrote the letter to the Virginia State Bar. In their response they stated that complaints of service requires Civil Court action. On the surface that seems reasonable, but then I remember 1995, calling attorneys to address the "Abuse of Process". Unlike other "Malpractice" issues these attorneys stated a retainer beyond what we could afford. We were financially destroyed by the actions / inaction's of counsel. From the business aspect we understand that legal malpractice is a hard issue to address, requiring skill and time which equates to money. Victims of legal malpractice, like us have a high likely hood of being financially damaged, unable to finance a Civil Action. This combination results in a barrier protecting attorneys and given the nature of the industry there is nothing to regulate or audit the services that these individuals render. The State Bar cites strategy as a method to get around addressing incompetence, stupidity or just plain negligence. This stance is a direct contradiction of their Canons.


  • After several letters to the Virginia State Bar, an organization that presents itself as an institution whose members are required adhere to a code of conduct or canons. We realize that they are lacking a mechanism to ensure that their membership adheres to any ethics, canons or code of conduct. A responsible institution would have presented proactive solutions. I would have presumed that a council of individuals that address a legal malpractice issue would be more effective. A Civil Action may be as functional if the Bar would sponsor firms that address "valid" malpractice issues and referring people like us (financially damaged individuals) to such firms. We survived, but it would be interesting to see the statistics of how many people that have been destroyed by incompetent counsel - unable to afford to address a Civil Action against their counsel the issue slipped through the cracks.


  • It is not in the best interests of the industry, Judges, individual attorneys or the State Bar to "fix" problems within their system. Poor implementation generates revenue for the industry, the greater the turnaround of clients the greater the profits. This perception explains "Prohibition" and the "Drug Wars" both initiatives generated a profitable clientele and accelerated business growth. Attorneys that do attempt to be "ethical" are not profitable or competitive because their clientele cannot afford them the attorney burns out. A solution to the revenue problem is increased volume and reduced service - following this to its conclusion results in high pay for little or no service. Theft is profitable, legal theft is more profitable - remember that by definition a thief, bunco artist and murderer can all be classified as professionals.


  • From the "Business" standpoint this industry is presenting itself as a problem, not a solution. For a sum of less than $1000 the problems that we were experiencing could have been eliminated. Our moving, the stalking, the harassment, the years of stress and the loss of revenue could have been ended within a year. The accuracy of the forensic sciences is balanced by poor implementation of collection methods and process - this makes for viable alternate solutions. For example I could have invoked my skills from the military profession to provide a solution to various situations we found ourselves in - but that would not be ethical. Such action would also provide revenue for the Judicial System - a catch 22 - because of incompetent representation, we were in situations, if we were to solve the situations we would have been on the other side of the line and exposed to the Whimsy of the Judicial System. The Judicial System profits from its incompetence and its competence - a very profitable situation for individuals within the industry.


  • Even in the media the Judicial System is not portrayed as providing solutions. Sure there are shows where we are awed by "professional actors" portraying ethical attorneys - these are stories. Even in these stories the only solution is to somehow become "close" to the Law Enforcement Officer or Attorney - this closeness will provide motivation for functional protection. The revolving door of the current implementation of process ensures an environment of fear, hostility and criminal activity. There is no motivation to "fix" this process, it generates revenue, it is profitable.


  • Lastly and maybe most importantly is the explanation for claims of an unfair Judicial System. A System that discriminates against individuals that are not "like" themselves. Minorities, gender and of course finance - if you do not fit their profile, they wont represent you competently, if you get upset they claim that you are ranting. When we got upset they would say "you can always get another attorney" - yeah, with what money. This behavior is similar to that of a street gang only with different threads.



    • I can go around and dredge up more details and I am sure that there will be claims that I am "ranting". I have facts to support my claims, five attorneys may not be a lot, but five out of five attorneys are not good odds. This industry is a facade, a trap its goal is not "Justice" but "Profit" from the misery of others. There is no functional mechanism to address "legal malpractice" for individuals financially destroyed by their implementation. From this stance it can be said that the institution responsible for ethics is not diligent in ensureing an ethical membership.


I posted some of our questions as to the institutional stonewalling, here is one response that we received: Better question is why are Bar Associations refusing to do anything about it Attorney's have turned the legal profession into a RICO entity If you don't believe me look up 18 USC 1960 (I believe) for the Definition. The question presents itself as to what a "RICO entity" is ?

Finally found out about it - "RICO" - stands for "Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization".
From my lay perspective this seems to describe a profile of our experiences with professional representation in Virginia - a racket with which attorneys can part clients from their money without competent service, aggressively defended by the "Virginia State Bar" an organization that claims to enforce an ethical membership.

July 26, 2000
Well J.B Casper still hasnt bothered to respond, can you say "AVOIDANCE".

The Virginia State Bar patted us on the back, told us that we were delusioned in believing that the field is infected. Their lip service stating "the majority of attorney's are honest" does not stand up to the facts of our experience.




May be we were unlucky five attorneys hired to represent us out of five combined with an attorney that chose to have the courts execute his punishment against escaping "chattel". Maybe it was just luck, from and the majority of attorneys are competent, five out of five - wonder how many times they expect us to allow ourselves to be stolen from before it is a problem 5, 10, 100, 1000, 10000, 100000, 1000000 - aw shucks we have integrity and I am a victim of an alien abduction.... But then these people are supposed to be "PROFESSIONALS".

I feel like I am talking to an individual that has the symptoms of a terminal illness, trying to convince them that they should seek treatment. They in turn AVOID the subject, like a child that does not want to listen, they yell, throw a tantrum - like JB Casper. Then when the facts are presented there is the "Silence of the Void" - they believe that maybe if they ignore it the problem will go away.

These people then get upset when an "event" occurs, this is because reality breaks in on their delusion.
Oops someone blew up some building - why ?
Oops someone is mailing bombs through the mail - why ?
Oops our children are hostile - why ?
Oops People are afraid and feel that they should arm themselves - why ?

From: scotter8@my-deja.com
Subject: Vanishing Attorneys of Virginia - Corollary
Date: 19 Sep 2000 00:00:00 GMT
X-Article-Creation-Date: Tue Sep 19 09:36:01 2000 GMT
Newsgroups: alt.lawyers.sue.sue.sue


Washington Post A26129-2000Sep7.html - N.Va. Lawyer Arrested, Accused of Embezzlement (Washington Post). Well they caught him, he didnt even bother to leave home. Kind of disappointing in that you would think that someone executing a scam such as he did would have left a "back door", with liquid assets you would never find me. Presumably he never expected to get caught, I cant help but wonder how much it took for the Virginia State Bar to go from strategy excuse to criminal activity. All he had to do is to jack up his rates, like our other attorneys, who claimed that because they had to do "something" we do not get our settlement, but they did bankrupt us.

In prior articles there was an inference of Cocaine use, damn, if I were to have dealt I could have had legal services by the gram - so much for being a law abiding citizen .

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.