Comments on: The meek will inherit the Bar.

By: Patrick K. Rocchio, Esq. – Hero (Update) | Lawyers on Strike

Patrick K. Rocchio, Esq. – Hero (Update) | Lawyers on Strike — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 22:08:11 +0000

[…] lawyers – should stand up for Mr. Rocchio – and Heather McClure O’Farrell, too (H/T John at People v. State) and strike for a day or something. I’m still here to […]

By: John Kindley

John Kindley — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 16:27:51 +0000

In reply to Atticus. My own disciplinary case was not initiated by the client but by the judge. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify that.

By: Patrick K. Rocchio

Patrick K. Rocchio — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 15:58:08 +0000

It’s me, the subject matter of the infamous Indiana Supreme Court Opinion regarding my despicable misconduct. The commentary above is superbly written, and its accuracy is laudable. Of course, the Opinion conveniently omitted many facts relevant to this matter. Indeed, I am portrayed as a madman, a lunatic, posing a risk that necessitates protecting the citizens of Indiana from my future misdeeds. Had the law clerk who was the ghost writer for the Opinion spent an afternoon in Michigan speaking with real judges and real lawyers familiar with me, he or she would have formed a completely opposite opinion of my reputation and character. Never mind. That would not have allowed me to be used as a poster boy for bad behavior. Send me an email with your address and I will provide you with a statement containing all of the facts relevant to this matter, accurate and consistent with the reality of events.

By: Atticus

Atticus — Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:59:28 +0000

See, this entire post just pisses me off no end. Of the three instances – Rocchio, O’Farrell and you – your trip to play poker was probably the most meritorious client complaint, and by any sensible standard it was not in the least meritorious. As an older lawyer the only thing I’d say about that is: don’t represent anyone on anything for $500.

Then again, look at the McClure-O’Farrel thing. All she’s doing is protecting herself financially – just a little bit – from some pain in the ass divorce clients who are much more prone to being a source of trouble than other kinds of clients, as evidenced by the ridiculous complaint itself. She’s trying to comply with the court decisions. Big mistake, apparently. They mean anything some judge decides they mean in hindsight.

Here’s what’s going on at this point. Attorney disciplinary committees are effectively killing off the private bar that can represent individuals, with one exception. If you want to practice independently, without selling your soul to TPTB, the only thing you can do is criminal defense. If you win an acquittal, the client will never complain; if the client is found guilty, then he is a “criminal”, and these are the only complainants attorney disciplinary committees don’t take seriously.

It’s really too bad what is happening in the profession. I feel really badly for you and the others.