| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 09/24/2012 9:41:11 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Duplicate |
Posted on 09/24/2012 8:00:35 AM PDT by raccoonradio
Warren attempted to deny her role, and referred to a Boston Globe article, but the Globe article supports Brown’s account. The Globe article indicated the representation was for a period of three years and Warren was paid $212,000. The case resulted in a Supreme Court victory for Travelers arising out of a bankruptcy case in New York.
Whatever the political implications of the exchange, Warren’s representation of Travelers raises another big potential problem for Warren.
Warren represented not just Travelers, but numerous other companies starting in the late 1990s working out of and using her Harvard Law School office in Cambridge, which she listed as her office of record on briefs filed with various courts. Warren, however, never has been licensed to practice law in Massachusetts.
As detailed below, there are at least two provisions of Massachusetts law Warren may have violated. First, on a regular and continuing basis she used her Cambridge office for the practice of law without being licensed in Massachusetts. Second, in addition to operating an office for the practice of law without being licensed in Massachusetts, Warren actually practiced law in Massachusetts without being licensed.
Warren refused to disclose the full extent of her private law practice when asked by The Boston Globe. If Warren denies that she has practiced law in Massachusetts without a license, Warren should disclose the full extent of her private law practice. The public has a right to assess whether Warren has failed to comply with the most basic requirement imposed on others, the need to become a member of the Bar of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in order to practice law in and from Massachusetts.
1. Warren Is Not Licensed To Practice Law In Massachusetts
2. Warren Used Her Cambridge Office as Her Law Office
(Excerpt) Read more at legalinsurrection.com ...
HC list ping
She admitted it on morning drive radio today:
Oh how silly, everyone knows that laws don’t apply to democrats! They ignore the laws, they are only for peons.
The real news here is that the Globe would actually pose something resembling a hard question to their candidate.
Yes but please remember she has 1/60 (or was it 1/250?) Indian blood. That exempts her from laws that us mortals must abide by.
Yeah, but it sounds like she was, as the saying goes, “off the reservation”.
WOW.
Wake up MA voters.
She’s a criminal and a fraud.
“She’s a criminal and a fraud.”
IOW’s...pre-qualified for the Democrat nomination....
Zactly.
Which begs the question: What does this make her former boss and professor of law mentor, Elena Kagan?
Lizzy Warren with a lie
Gave the Democrats a black eye.
When she saw what she had done,
She gave the Democrats another one.
Scott Brown in the next debate must be waiting to uncork the observation, “I may not be a professor at Harvard, like you, but unlike you, I never practiced law without a lisence. And, by the way, I *am* lisenced to practice law in Massachusetts. Unlike you.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.