tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post5520910382676477077..comments2023-11-03T06:35:48.003-05:00Comments on Shark and Shepherd: Charges against Gableman remain a stretchRick Esenberghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07280070509167910367noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-6782910879167735232012-01-06T16:33:34.750-06:002012-01-06T16:33:34.750-06:00I would like to know if there are any other cases ...I would like to know if there are any other cases where a judge had an ethics charge leveled against them where their lawyer set up a "contingency fee" based bill.Johnnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-91647283965810396262012-01-06T16:10:33.549-06:002012-01-06T16:10:33.549-06:00“State law permits the payment of fees to judges w...“State law permits the payment of fees to judges who prevail in ethics cases.”<br /><br />Just because the law provides this opportunity, a judge is obligated to carefully weigh the inherent problems associated with making contingency fee arrangements with lawyers with whom they have close ties philosophically and politically. Yes, a judge certainly desires a law firm with a strong reputation to defend them on ethics charges, but that is why he/she, in their position, take extra precautions to prevent any hints of impropriety. Having another law firm--one that is not explicitly tied to the ongoing narrative--handle his business would have been done wonders.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-5590574637648385152012-01-06T14:10:34.904-06:002012-01-06T14:10:34.904-06:00Ricky needs to take an ethics class.Ricky needs to take an ethics class.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-21932117862348179992012-01-05T09:23:55.146-06:002012-01-05T09:23:55.146-06:00I'm just a rudimentary reader of English, but ...I'm just a rudimentary reader of English, but it seems to me that the 'valuable' in 'valuable consideration' anticipates a consideration 'able to be valued.' Perhaps Prof. Rick can undertake to valuing Mike Gableman's peppercorn -- in U.S. dollars -- which was not only wholly speculative but was not even Gableman's wholly speculative peppercorn to give. Unless of course Prof. Rick is out of risible contortions with this latest Gableman apologetic. This case presents an unprecedented nexus of, <i>inter alia</i>, contract law, legal and judicial ethics, and, of all things, contingent fee arrangements more common to personal injury actions and which <i>are</i> based upon hard dollar figures, yet Prof. Rick treats it all as just another day at the office. Which I suppose it may be, if your office happens to be Prof. Rick's or <a href="http://www.wisconsinwatch.org/2012/01/04/attorney-conduct-at-issue-in-gableman-dust-up/" rel="nofollow">Eric McLeod</a>'s.illusory tenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08524761974822871419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-54623586506678901862012-01-05T07:22:17.667-06:002012-01-05T07:22:17.667-06:00Anon 8:44
You appear to agree that the paper has ...Anon 8:44<br /><br />You appear to agree that the paper has a slant in its coverage. That's the issue, rather than a hypothetical about how I or anyone else might react.Geo mitchellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-84740410562309651042012-01-05T07:18:15.278-06:002012-01-05T07:18:15.278-06:00FWIW, although the paper MJS doesn't contain D...FWIW, although the paper MJS doesn't contain Dinh's letter, the online version does link to it.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10287196327536226744noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-84352996457897108512012-01-04T20:44:54.636-06:002012-01-04T20:44:54.636-06:00George, you're invested in a particular narrat...George, you're invested in a particular narrative as well. Tell me that if the tables were turned and this was the Chief Justice or Walsh Bradley that you wouldn't be squealing like a stuck pig!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-35461813127413500032012-01-04T15:31:36.729-06:002012-01-04T15:31:36.729-06:00Rick's analyses (including an earlier post) pr...Rick's analyses (including an earlier post) provide helpful context and perspective. The journal sentinel is invested in a particular narrative. Its spin won't change. It at least owes it's readers the right to read Atty. Dinh's complaint re it's coverage.George mitchellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-4550996075647712762012-01-04T11:06:59.675-06:002012-01-04T11:06:59.675-06:00Or they could just move him to another parish, rig...Or they could just move him to another parish, right Dad29? You know, because his pattern of practice hasn't been established yet.Display Namehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15842340986220388709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-5073428648873977412012-01-04T08:57:59.018-06:002012-01-04T08:57:59.018-06:00The legislation governs, as Barrister Esenberg not...The legislation governs, as Barrister Esenberg notes.<br /><br />Too bad other lawyers don't seem to get that.<br /><br />Having said that....<br /><br />The facts and circumstances of the instant case produce a 3-3 tie, so to speak.<br /><br />The MSM/Left would have us believe that Gableman is corrupt. But that cannot be said with certainty, unless a pattern of practice emerges.<br /><br />It hasn't.Dad29https://www.blogger.com/profile/08554276286736923821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-68906316956935477282012-01-03T19:19:32.714-06:002012-01-03T19:19:32.714-06:00Mr. Esenberg. An ethics charge is not a personal i...Mr. Esenberg. An ethics charge is not a personal injury case. Defending against an ethics charge will not result in Justice (I hate to use that word for him) Gableman receiving damages. The only thing he could possibly receive is dismissal of the charge. In this case, those sitting in judgment of Gableman -- his peers in the Supreme Court -- were unable to convince themselves to dismiss the case against him. The case ended up in a 3-3 tie. (Please don't argue technicalities of what happened to the case in the Judicial Commission -- what matters is that there was no favorable decision here for Gableman.)<br /><br />How can you possibly defend the receipt of free legal services by a sitting Supreme Court Justice? That is what happened here. The fee agreement was a sham, and you know it. <br /><br />Moreover, your claim that Gableman's vote "did not differ materially" from that of the other conservative justices does not hold up. It is material that he sided with the law firm in MORE cases than any other justice, especially when the total number of cases involved is five where he voted on their side, and nine overall. To say that 20 percent of cases is "not a material difference" doesn't cut it. The cases where he voted against the Michael, Best attorneys were cases where liberal justices voted against them as well, meaning that MB&F attorneys represented the side with a lousy case. (Three cases were decided 7-0, one was decided 6-1). <br /><br />The only "consideration" in this case is the notoriety gained by the Michael Best and Friedrich law firm, and by Michael McLeod in particular. Maybe that's enough for them. But is it truly legal "consideration" to be known (as if they weren't before) as the law firm fixer for Republican politicians?JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03075256737290432403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-10569727838115985142012-01-03T16:49:55.371-06:002012-01-03T16:49:55.371-06:00The 'smell test'?
Which statute does that...The 'smell test'?<br /><br />Which statute does that fall within?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-35043467575427772132012-01-03T14:28:04.140-06:002012-01-03T14:28:04.140-06:00"He did not have the money."
So he rece..."He did not have the money."<br /><br />So he received a gift from Bopp also.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-25551972846463420612012-01-03T12:23:46.205-06:002012-01-03T12:23:46.205-06:00www.olhardireito.blogspot.com - US ELECTIONSwww.olhardireito.blogspot.com - US ELECTIONSFrancisco Castelo Brancohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18119178156345458401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-73674260021849635442012-01-03T12:03:16.522-06:002012-01-03T12:03:16.522-06:00Another angle: Dinh's argument is that there ...Another angle: Dinh's argument is that there was "consideration," so the arrangement is Kosher.<br /><br />What if Esenberg Cadillac sold an Escalade to the Justice for $10 a few months before Lawyer Esenberg argued a case before him?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20692053.post-44699158620896996252012-01-03T12:00:50.074-06:002012-01-03T12:00:50.074-06:00But -- assuming everything you say is accurate, wh...But -- assuming everything you say is accurate, which is a leap -- does it pass the smell test? The lawyer who argues the case before the Supreme Court today is the same lawyer who provided perhaps tens of thousands of dollars in legal services -- without charge -- to one of the Justices?<br /><br />If you were the litigant on the other side and the "Get-out-of-jail- free" Justice was one of the "libs," can you say with a straight face that you wouldn't be screaming to high heaven?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com