Giuliani condo/apartment being raided

#280
#280
lawgator1 said:
Lawyers cannot lie to the Court. I don't know the details but that is what is reported
Click to expand...

“ Should Not “ .. neither can defendants or witnesses. We all know it’s done all the time , that’s why I posted about the irony .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#281
#281
0nelilreb said:
You do see the irony in suspending a lawyers license for lying , right ? Especially in a city like New York .😂
Click to expand...
Not at all, but that’s because I’m not ignorant of the rules governing the practice.

I make my living off my law license. If I lose it, I have to completely start over with something else. There’s no way in hell I’d be stupid enough to do what he did for any client.

The only surprise here is that they actually suspended someone for something other than stealing client money.
 
#282
#282
n_huffhines said:
Is there some history of lawyers getting away with lying to the courts in NYC, or something?
Click to expand...

No why would you think that New York City , Chicago , LOST ANGLES , or Any major metropolitan city with a history of mob and corruption would have a history of Lawyers lying to the court ?
You added ( getting away with ) to the conversation .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#283
#283
lawgator1 said:
Lawyers cannot lie to the Court. I don't know the details but that is what is reported
Click to expand...
I am not an attorney (obviously) so someone please educate me. Lawyers cannot lie in court or they cannot get caught lying in court? Thanks!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#286
#286
0nelilreb said:
You know what the “ Irony “ is that I was talking about good sir .
Click to expand...
It’s not ironic when there’s a rule against something, the rule gets broken, and the rule is enforced.

It’s unfortunate that it doesn’t happen more often, but that’s tragic, not ironic.
 
#287
#287
RockyTop85 said:
It’s not ironic when there’s a rule against something, the rule gets broken, and the rule is enforced.

It’s unfortunate that it doesn’t happen more often, but that’s tragic, not ironic.
Click to expand...

Well I guess I can amend my post to “ Tragic” but I thought irony was funnier .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and RockyTop85
#289
#289
PEPPERJAX said:
I am not an attorney (obviously) so someone please educate me. Lawyers cannot lie in court or they cannot get caught lying in court? Thanks!
Click to expand...


Lying to a court is a strict no-no. You report the facts and then argue over the characterization. But court is one place where touting alternative facts is just not a wise idea.
 
#290
#290
lawgator1 said:
Lying to a court is a strict no-no. You report the facts and then argue over the characterization. But court is one place where touting alternative facts is just not a wise idea.
Click to expand...

the question is did he lie to court or just make false public statements?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#291
#291
volinbham said:
the question is did he lie to court or just make false public statements?
Click to expand...


That's why I said I don't know the details. The CNN reporting is that he did both. Generally speaking, you have an obligation to always tell the truth. The reality is that its lying to a court that gets you in trouble.

The model rule is Rule 3.3 Candor Towards the Tribunal:

(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:

(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;
(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or
(3) offer evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer, has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false.


ABA Model Rule 4.1, “Truthfulness in Statements to Others,” states:


In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly:

(a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person; or

(b) fail to disclose a material fact to a third person when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by a client, unless disclosure is prohibited by Rule 1.6.
 
#292
#292
volinbham said:
the question is did he lie to court or just make false public statements?
Click to expand...

Caught part of this on Fox at lunch. I heard both. But, didn't hear enough to catch if it was misspoke and changed to false public comments, or if it was indeed both. It would be prudent for courts to only suspend him for lying in/to the courts. Suspension for false public statements gets into opinion/perception and suppression of free speech. Dangerous norm to set by a court.
 
#295
#295
RockyTop85 said:
The initial finding is that he made demonstrably false and misleading statements to courts, lawmakers, and the public at large.
Click to expand...

The current administration does that every day. They would have enough ammo with the other 2 allegations. I also understood them to say it was temporary. So, if by the above rules, if he corrects his statements to the courts, would his license then be reinstated ??
 
#296
#296
GVF said:
The current administration does that every day. They would have enough ammo with the other 2 allegations. I also understood them to say it was temporary. So, if by the above rules, if he corrects his statements to the courts, would his license then be reinstated ??
Click to expand...
Correcting his false statement might be a good idea, at this point, but I’m not familiar with New York’s specific process.

There’s generally no first amendment grounds to challenge the suspension of a law license. It’s not being established in this instance, has not been the norm, and has not proven to be dangerous, thus far.
 
#297
#297
RockyTop85 said:
Correcting his false statement might be a good idea, at this point, but I’m not familiar with New York’s specific process.

There’s generally no first amendment grounds to challenge the suspension of a law license. It’s not being established in this instance, has not been the norm, and has not proven to be dangerous, thus far.
Click to expand...

The 1A grounds I was thinking of is if they included the public at large comments. That is free speech, whether it is advised or not. There is no law that prohibits free speech being an opinion. I was looking at the general rules LG posted above. Unless there is more detail, that excerpt does not put a deadline on correcting "incorrect" statements. And if there isn't and he plays the game and issues corrections expediently now, then what grounds for suspension would be left. Simplified synopsis of course from a perspective of not much info yet based on that short excerpt of rules.
 
#298
#298
GVF said:
The 1A grounds I was thinking of is if they included the public at large comments. That is free speech, whether it is advised or not. There is no law that prohibits free speech being an opinion. I was looking at the general rules LG posted above. Unless there is more detail, that excerpt does not put a deadline on correcting "incorrect" statements. And if there isn't and he plays the game and issues corrections expediently now, then what grounds for suspension would be left. Simplified synopsis of course from a perspective of not much info yet based on that short excerpt of rules.
Click to expand...

Most jurisdictions treat the practice of law as a privilege bestowed by the state rather than a right or property. When you’re admitted, you agree to abide by certain behavioral standards. So my recollection is that most jurisdictions will not recognize a first amendment challenge to a disciplinary proceedings in circumstances like this.

It’s hard to violate those standards enough to get disbarred without stealing or commingling client money, because the profession doesn’t want to stifle zealous advocacy and creativity, but once you do, there aren’t many silver bullet defenses to it.

Supposedly he has really good lawyers so he should get a fair shake.
 
#299
#299
lawgator1 said:
Lying to a court is a strict no-no. You report the facts and then argue over the characterization. But court is one place where touting alternative facts is just not a wise idea.
Click to expand...
Defense attorneys lie all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top