| ► LA Daily Journal – 11/02/00 - Disparaged lawyer sues over site |
 |
 |
|
LA Daily Journal – 11/02/00 - Disparaged lawyer sues over site By Michael Jonathan Grinfield – Daily Staff Writer
Santa Ana, California
An Orange County attorney who was disparaged on a Web site after a dispute with a former client has struck back with a lawsuit.
Ronald E. Lais, an Anaheim family law attorney, sued Rachel Wilson, a woman he represented in a custody battle for just four days, and two others, alleging that they disparaged him in cyberspace after a disagreement over a fee. In his complaint, filed in Orange County Superior Court last week, Lais charged that statements published on www.amoralethics.com were "false,
insulting, misleading, derogatory, and extremely embarrassing." Ronald E. Lais v David Palmer, OOCC12950 (filed Oct.27,2000).
The Web site, titled "Committee to Expose Dishonest and Incompetent Attorneys and Judges," is the brainchild of David Palmer, a disabled veteran from Maumee, Ohio. It contains allegations against a number of lawyers and jurists. Also named as a defendant in Lais' suit, Palmer took up Wilson's cause after learning of her dispute with the lawyer.
Palmer formed the committee in 1993, but the Webs site went on line in 1997, Palmer said. Its purpose is to "expose attorney and judicial misconduct," a task he said the legal profession is "loath to do."
Lais accusing Palmer of posting pages of negative comments about the attorney's office practices, according to the complaint. Included among the litany of abuses that Lais alleged were false is one accusing the lawyer of "being nothing more than a common criminal disguised as a lawyer," according to court papers filed by Lais.
In addition, the Webs site claims that Lais failed to inform prospective clients of his suspension from the practice of law, pending complaints with the State Bar and a host of other misdeeds, according to court documents.
Although he had yet to see the lawsuit, Palmer said his defense will be that, "Lais is defamation-proof, and that his lawsuit is nothing but a sham."
Wilson said that on Sept. 9, 1999, she hired Lais based on the representations made on his Web site that he was an expert in interstate custody battles. At the time, Wilson's son Remington, then 13 years old, had fled an allegedly physically abusive relationship with his father, and she needed a lawyer to overturn an Indiana custody order on an emergency basis.
Instead, Wilson alleged that Lais took a $5,000 retainer, then failed to perform any services or return the fees, accusations that Lais denies. In July, the State Bar filed notice of disciplinary charges against Lais based on Wilson's allegations, along with those made by other former clients.
"I'm going to countersue or find some other way to deal with this," said Wilson, who added she ultimately got custody of Remington, though with the help of other lawyers.
Lais said he could defend against all of the accusations against him.
"Suffice it to say, I have not put my tail between my legs and bowed down to the State Bar. I'm their easy target at this point. Most lawyers don't want to have a controversy with a client and I'm not afraid of that controversy."
In July 1999, the Supreme Court ordered Lais suspended for two years, though it stayed execution for all but 90 days. That action arose from disputes with five clients that included allegations that Lais failed to return unearned fees, didn't properly perform legal services and attempted to induce withdrawal of State Bar complaints by making settlements with clients.
In April, the Review Department of the State Bar Court recommended a three-year suspension after determining that Lais pursued a frivolous appeal on behalf of a client, assisted another client in violating a court order, and used "bad faith" tactics in litigating a civil action.
That disciplinary ruling is on appeal to the Supreme Court.
Meanwhile, Lais' troubles with the State Bar aren't over. In August, the State Bar filed additional charges against Lais, alleging that he failed to refund unearned fees and engaged in various acts of misrepresentation involving client matters."
"We view this is a serious matter," said Charles A. Murray, a deputy trial counsel for the State Bar. He anticipates the charges against Lais will go to a hearing next year.
Lais has an ongoing battle with the State Bar, accusing it of singling him out for disciplinary action because he has repeatedly challenged and criticized the Office of the Chief Trial Counsel, its investigators and attorneys.
|