Skip to comments.Trial Lawyers Contribute, Shareholder Suits Follow
Posted on 02/03/2010 8:44:48 AM PST by AtlasStalled
It is legal for lawyers, like anyone else, to give campaign money to politicians. But questions arise when the politicians are local officials with influence over the selection of legal counsel for shareholder lawsuits filed by public pension funds, a role that can be lucrative.
A Wall Street Journal analysis documented the extent of campaign giving by plaintiffs' law firms specializing in shareholder litigation. It found that 25 leading firms, their lawyers and family members contributed a total of more than $21 million in the past decade to state-level candidates and party funds, as well as to national-party groups that work to elect state officials. Less than 40% went to candidates within the law firms' home states.
Labaton Sucharow was among the donation leaders. The law firm, its lawyers and their family members made $612,000 in campaign contributions in 24 states outside its New York home base in the decade.
Some lawyers say widespread political giving by plaintiffs' law firms, especially outside their home states and near the time when counsel are chosen, is evidence of a corrosive pay-to-play culture in the securities-litigation industry.
"Plaintiffs' lawyers donate because they think it buys them access to people who make decisions over how pension funds select counsel," says Fred Isquith, a partner at Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, a plaintiffs' firm in New York. Such giving "creates an appearance of complete impropriety," he says, and "should be outlawed."
The American Bar Association takes a similar position. The ABA, in giving guidance on ethics, says lawyers shouldn't accept a "government assignment" if they made a political contribution "for the purpose of obtaining or being considered for" such a job.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Precisely why “THE TITLES OF NOBILITY” amendment was passed, banning LAWYERS from VOTING or HOlding ANY PUBLIC OFFICE. funny how it mysteriously disappeared after 50 years.
Full disclosure ... I am a lawyer.
I think there should be a revision of legal ethics codes to ban political contributions from law firms and lawyers to judicial election campaigns. It is a clear conflict of interest for the attorney, the firm and the judge — and in some cases could be actual bribery. Disbarrment is warranted.
Political contributions are harder to deal with. Attorneys and law firms have the right to influence their political representatives ... they have no right to influence judges outside of the Courtroom.
This would be the original 13th Amendment...
Meanwhile, in the real private sector, investment firms are barred from doing business with a municipality for two years if a single member contributes a significant sum to a political campaign... even if they have no personal municipal dealings.
Once again, we have a government of the lawyers, for the lawyers and by the lawyers...
This would be the original 13th Amendment...”
the original 13th prohibited lawyers from making campaign contributions? I dont think that is true.
Please reread the conversation you interrupted. If you don’t see the difference then I can’t help you.
I re-read it. Your assessment of the 13th A as originally written is inaccurate.
eyeamok's comment to which I responded: "Precisely why THE TITLES OF NOBILITY amendment was passed, banning LAWYERS from VOTING or HOlding ANY PUBLIC OFFICE. funny how it mysteriously disappeared after 50 years."
Next time you can do your own research to prove me wrong. Good day.
Yep, that would be the one, At the time the people were deeply afraid as to where our country was heading, They feared that before long the people would not be able to understand the Laws that were being written and the people would get screwed by Lawyers writing Laws to Benefit Lawyers that the common folk could not understand Funny how things turned out huh?
And Yes, Non Citizens Cannot Contribute to Campaigns, and Becoming a Lawyer would have removed citizenship as it should be, Why or How could We the People ever be able to Trust a Person who has Already Taken an OATH to be Amoral(Keeping Dirty Secrets without regard for the consequences of said action to the people)to a Foreign Body, such as the BAR Association (a non government entity)??