A Grandmotherly Asp Set To Strike

Buried deep within Governor Jodi Rell’s proposed budget is a provision that would get a lawyer disbarred, where the lawyer foolish enough to act on it. But the governor is no lawyer. She is the head of the executive branch. And she is asking the Legislature to help her rob a fund created by the judiciary for purposes of helping clients and lawyers in need. What will be done to stop her?

At issue is the Client Security Fund. This fund is a creature of the judiciary. It’s stated purpose is to provide relief to client’s who lose property or money as a result of the dishonest conduct of lawyers. It also funds a crisis intervention and referral service for lawyers who crumble under the weight of the world. Lawyers are assessed an annual fee to go into this fund, which, constitutes a trust.

The governor’s budget proposes that the state seize $2 million from the fund to help meet the current shortfall in revenues. It has folks in the judiciary seeing red, and not just red ink.
It seems a doubtful proposition as a matter of law that these funds can be seized without so much as wink and a nod to the separation of powers doctrine. We have three branches of government, after all.

To the judiciary falls the regulation of lawyers and the relationship between lawyers and clients. If the judiciary creates a fund by taxing lawyers and then puts those monies in trust to assure that both lawyers and clients are protected from the vagaries of life, what possible legal theory supports an executive or legislative branch seizure? I hope the judiciary is considering a constitutional challenge to this proposal.

Aren’t these trust funds? When a lawyer dips into to a trust fund for an unauthorized purpose, he or she faces disbarment, if not criminal prosecution. When public charities run afoul of accounting requirements, the Attorney General’s office has plenty to say. What precedent supports the Governor’s seizure of trust funds?

Of course, Gov. Rell is nothing if not shrewd, a grandmotherly asp if ever there was one, I say. So perhaps she is bluffing. Perhaps this feint at what looks to be a form of theft is merely a way of laying siege to a different fortress. "What? I cannot violate this trust? Oh, well, then I shall have to do what I hesitate to do: I shall tax legal services, even if that means the costs of those services shall increase for clients."

The economy is in tatters and the state’s budget is awash in red ink. Revenues are needed. But so are savings. What is the governor doing to cut state expenses?

I saw a recent list of the top 250 wage earners in state service. The salaries ranged from $1.6 million for UConn basketball coach Jim Calhoun to a low of $217,000 for an emergency room physician. Buried within the list are quarter of a million dollar registered nurses and a whopping $400,000 for the state’s top prison doctor. Presumably all of these people also enjoy generous state benefits, as well. These salaries are, I suspect, well above the mean for lawyers.

There is something obscene about these salaries for state employment at a time in which many folks face unemployment and the loss of homes. The state’s safety nets will be stretched mighty thin in a time of crisis. Among those safety nets is the Client Security Fund.

Sucking the life out of the Client Security Fund makes no sense. Need a few extra million? Give the state’s basketball and football coaches a call. They’re swimming in cash.

Reprinted courtesy of the Connecticut Law Tribune.

Comments: (2)

  • Why not seize the Client Security Fund? Hasit eve...
    Why not seize the Client Security Fund? Hasit ever existed to truly assist clients fromattorneys who 'play the fence' or sell theirclients out as do Employment Lawyers suing the State for clients who are state employees egregiously retaliated against; i.e., death threats, paid and unpaid leaves awaiting months, even years, for biased internal investigations, emotional and physical injuries after being labeled 'a snitch' in a unionized work environment,unjust terminations, blacklisting us from working in our professions, DCF fabricating documention to take our children away, marital dissolutions due to the stress and strain of these retaliataions, civil courts denying due process of law to favor our adversaries, false arrests and prosecutions. We are rendered penniless, homeless and emotionally distraught all the while our lawyers add to our trauma by refusing to validate us and our claims while billing us tens of thousands of dollars with quasi defenses for each claim under separate suit. What is our recourse as an unemployed exState Employee? File grievances with the BAR and the Judicial Review Board, the brotherhood of the Third Branch of Government? The Client Security Fund doesn't provide for us nor any client financially and emotionally harmed due to political influence, favoritism or nepotism.$2 million dollars sitting in a fund 'for prosterity' or feed the State's 'coffers', makes no difference to clients harmed by CT's third branch of government. No grievance against YOU has ever prevailed, so what do you care? Don't lawyers carry malpractice insurance as do all other professions? No other profession contributes to a 'client security fund' nor do we 'tax' our clients. Medical Doctors have proposeda Review Board for medical complaints similar to what attorneys have with the ABA recognizing ALL the benefits of such a system for their practice. Wouldn't it be 'nice' for all professionals to be 'reviewed' by their peers for mistakes in practice. Wouldn't it be 'nice' if all professions could charge their 'standard fees' plus 33% when outcomes are positive for our clients. How many professionals make $300+/hr as their 'standard fee'? Wouldn't it be 'nice' if all professions could make the rules of our practice for the benefit of our practice and govern ourselves via our Review Boards presided over by our colleques. P.S.: I enjoy your blog as it reveals the real Norm Pattis your clients don't get to see. My comment doesn't necessiarly reflect your client's position regarding your representation; rather, it is a 'consensus' of CT State Employees who have been and are embroiled in the INjustice System. Personally,you've been my attorney for years and although I've 'spewed' my frustration with the INjustice System on you, you never desserted meas my other attorneys have. It took me years to understand that 'justice' is afforded to the previleged and politically connected in CT and lawyers who 'play the fence' is a means of survival and is the best legal representation we can get. Politics is changing and you can be a champion for civil rights and labor laws for government employees.
    Posted on March 9, 2009 at 2:57 am by Rosey
  • A fund for lawyers who succumb to drug and alcohol...
    A fund for lawyers who succumb to drug and alcohol abuse? Please.
    Posted on March 11, 2009 at 8:09 am by Anonymous

Add a Comment

Display with comment:
Won't show with comment:
What is 3 X 3?
*Comment must be approved and then will show on page.
© Norm Pattis is represented by Elite Lawyer Management, managing agents for Exceptional American Lawyers
Media & Speaker booking [hidden email]