Legal Ethics
Lawyers Defend Long-Distance Supervision of Overwhelmed Associate
Posted Jun 9, 2008, 12:15 pm CDT
By Debra Cassens Weiss
Two lemon-law lawyers accused of failing to adequately supervise an overwhelmed associate faced skeptical judges on Maryland’s highest court on Friday.
Lawyers Craig Kimmel and Robert Silverman of Pennsylvania, founders of the 1-800-Lemon-Law firm, said they supervised the Maryland associate through phone calls and e-mail, the Daily Record reports. Thirty-four of the associate’s cases were dismissed when she failed to keep up with discovery. She had filed 461 cases in little under a year.
The Daily Record reported on the oral arguments. Lawyer Charles Martinez argued for the lawyers that communicating this way is “a well-established fact of law firm existence in this day and age.” He urged a “mild sanction” rather than the indefinite suspension recommended by the Maryland Attorney Grievance Commission.
But Chief Judge Robert Bell said the lawyers could have examined the case files. “You don’t rely simply on the electronic record,” he said. “You must check the docket.”
Judge Lynne Battaglia made a similar observation, while Judge Glenn Harrell Jr. wondered if the lawyers were “just lucky” that they didn’t have similar problems in other offices, according to the story.
Related Stories
- Will Fed’l Judge’s Behavior Shift Line Between Judicial Freedom and Misconduct?
1 hour, 16 minutes ago - Prosecutor Says Secret Pact Was ‘Serious Judgment Error’
3 hours, 23 minutes ago - Former Conn. Ethics Counsel Faces Ethics Complaint Over Fake Letter
3 hours, 43 minutes ago - Judge Won’t Sanction Prosecutor for Making PD Do Unnecessary Work
4 hours, 6 minutes ago
Related Topics
Commenting has expired on this post.
Comments
Posted by lab - 2 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 6 hours, 56 minutes ago
Did it ever occur to these supervising attorneys that they needed to physically visit their other offices to personally touch base with what is happening? Whatever happened to designating a supervising attorney in that more distant office? Where are the business management skills here?
Posted by cindy - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 12 hours, 28 minutes ago
461 cases filed in a little under a year - who was helping the attorney handle all that work
Posted by Lemon Hater - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 11 hours, 43 minutes ago
I wish the Maryland court could suspend them for the crime of using one of the most annoying jingles ever in an advertisement. That song gets under my skin everytime I hear it . . . Driving a lemon, make the call . . .
Posted by Trump - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 11 hours, 17 minutes ago
461 cases in a year?! With volume like that I’m sure they have a pat system and boilerplate complaints. But still…
Posted by Carlos C. Alsina Batista - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 10 hours, 47 minutes ago
Given that discovery requests are not electronically filed, there is no way the supervising attorneys could reasonably claim that checking the electronic docket was enough to keep up with the cases. Without a doubt, many dimissals under Rule 37(b)(2)(C) for failing to answer discovery were going to be inevitable. The liability must be considerable.
Posted by associate - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 9 hours, 58 minutes ago
Cindy,
I’d bet there was no one helping; maybe one secretary. That’s probably why they’re having issues now.
Posted by Friend of Craig and Rob - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 9 hours, 24 minutes ago
I actually worked with Craig (and Rob) in Philly when we were fresh out of law school and struggling at a tiny firm during the early ‘90s recession. I went to a top ten law school and these guys did not. When the economy rebounded, I was able to return to a large law firm making a decent salary and these guys teamed up, went out on their own, established a niche practice in lemon law and, fewer than 10 years later, they were rich.... good for them and I hope they win!
Posted by Friends don't let friends violate the rules - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 7 hours, 5 minutes ago
Why does “Friend of Craig and Rob” hope they win? Because they’re rich? Because they found their niche? Violating the rules in ways that could potentially harm clients is not something anyone should celebrate just because they are friendly or wealthy.
Posted by Friend of Craig and Rob - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 6 hours, 34 minutes ago
Craig and Rob have helped thousands of consumers who were ripped off by the auto manufacturers achieve justice; their work throughout the years more than militates against any lapses in judgment they might have had in supervising a distant associate. We need more consumer-advocate fighters like these two guys. And you know what, they are actually pretty likable, decent men who were fun to be around (even though I haven’t seen them in years).
Posted by Friends still don't let decent friends violate the - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 6 hours, 2 minutes ago
I don’t think Craig and Rob are in front of the Maryland judges on their likability or decency. Is it okay to run their mill ("thousands of consumers....") in such a way that a SINGLE associate files 400+ cases in a year has no supervision?
This case isn’t about them not being good guys or even advocates. Basic responsibility for the behind-the-scenes non-partner attorney is why they faces these charges.
Posted by Ron - 2 months, 2 weeks, 2 days, 5 hours, 47 minutes ago
As to #9 - So, your logic means, because I’ve let thousands live, I shouldn’t be in trouble for killing that one. If these guys weren’t properly supervising, they were irresponsible (even if fun) and should be on the hook to the 34 clients whose cases got dismissed.
Posted by Legal Ethics - 2 months, 2 weeks, 1 day, 7 hours, 34 minutes ago
"Lapses in Judgment” does not justify or explain a system designed to fail. These guys should have been in the mortgage business.
Posted by Maria - 2 months, 1 week, 5 days, 8 hours, 37 minutes ago
Sounds like inadequate supervision was a problem here - but I disagree with the apparent premise that supervision by phone calls and email is inherently inadequate. In my opinion, many associates would be perfectly capable of functioning as effective and ethical advocates for their clients despite the fact that their supervising attorneys are remote. When I was an associate, very few of the partners I worked with would literally review the files of my cases - they would just check in with me frequently to make sure things were on track. They could have done that as easily by phone or email as in person.