At JDJournal, we’re proud to spotlight a crucial pillar of legal excellence: Ethics and Professional Responsibility in Law. This in-depth feature, originally presented by LawCrossing, explores how integrity, accountability, and ethical conduct form the bedrock of every successful legal career. Below, we spotlight why this subject matters and how it empowers legal professionals to thrive.

Why Ethics Is the Core of Legal Practice

• Ethics as a Moral Compass
  Ethics guide lawyers through complex decisions, ensuring that they act fairly and justly—not just technically. These moral principles steer lawyers toward serving clients, courts, and society with integrity. Professional responsibility extends these values—cementing duties.
• Upholding Trust & Rule of Law
  Lawyers are trust-bearers—trusted to defend rights and enforce justice. Ethical conduct is essential to maintain confidence in the legal system and reinforce its impartiality.

Key Ethical Duties at a Glance

• Client-Focused Obligations
  Legal professionals must demonstrate competence, loyalty, diligence, and unwavering confidentiality. By doing so, they earn trust and build robust attorney-client relationships.
• Allegiance to the Justice System
  Ethical lawyers honor court procedures, demonstrate honesty in all dealings, and contribute to the fair administration of justice—guardians of both their clients’ interests and public confidence.
• Responsibility to Society
  Lawyers also bear a broader social obligation—promoting access to justice, participating in pro bono work, and upholding the integrity and effectiveness of the profession as a whole.
• The ABA Model Rules as the Foundation
  The ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct serve as the benchmark for lawyer ethics across the U.S., setting standards for competence, confidentiality, candor, and conflict management. These rules guide licensing exams like the MPRE and are foundational in shaping ethical legal practice nationwide.

Building and Strengthening Ethical Foundations

• Embed Ethics in Legal Education
  Law schools play a vital role by weaving ethics and professional responsibility throughout the curriculum. Likewise, Continuing Legal Education (CLE) keeps practicing attorneys abreast of evolving ethical standards and real-world dilemmas.
• Formal Codes & Professional Oversight
  Bar associations and regulatory bodies enforce ethical norms through robust codes of conduct—detailing expectations on confidentiality, adversarial behavior, and fairness. These guide professional standards and disciplinary enforcement.

Grave Consequences of Ethical Failings

• Breach of Client Confidentiality
  Violations can result in civil liability, disciplinary sanctions (even disbarment), and severe damage to professional reputation and career prospects.
• Erosion of Credibility
  Ethical lapses can irreversibly damage a lawyer’s credibility. Trust is hard to rebuild, and a tarnished reputation often means clients and peers look elsewhere.

Why JDJournal Champions This Message

• Foundation for Trust and Excellence
  Ethics are not optional—they are foundational. Lawyers must hold themselves to these standards to protect clients, bolster the justice system, and earn public confidence.
• Navigating Ethical Complexity with Clarity
  Whether you’re encountering a client request that feels ethically questionable or balancing candor against zealous advocacy, knowing how to act is key to protecting your standing and integrity.
• Investing in Lifelong Ethical Practice
  True professionalism is rooted in lifelong learning. Regularly engaging with ethics courses, case studies, and mentorship ensures you’re prepared to face evolving ethical challenges.

Take Action: Elevate Your Ethical Game

1. Enroll in ethics-focused CLE and law school modules to sharpen your professional judgment.
2. Stay grounded in rules like those of the ABA, and revisit them during key career moments.
3. Prioritize confidentiality and integrity—these are non-negotiable foundations of credibility.
4. Engage with mentors, bar advisors, and trusted colleagues when navigating tough ethical situations.
5. Serve ethically and wholeheartedly—remember, your conduct impacts clients, courts, and the broader legal landscape.

Ready to strengthen your foundation as a lawyer? Stay ahead of ethical challenges by exploring exclusive career resources, guides, and opportunities on LawCrossing. Build your career with integrity, sharpen your professional responsibility, and take the next confident step in your legal journey today.

The post Ethics and Professional Responsibility in Law—Your Guide to Building an Unshakeable Foundation first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Learn more from this report: The Highest-Paying Law Firms in the United States

💼 Associates: The Cravath Scale Sets the Standard

• First-year associates now start at $225,000 in base salary.
• Pay steadily rises, reaching $435,000 by the eighth year.
• Annual bonuses add another $20,000 to $115,000, with special bonuses boosting total senior associate pay to nearly $575,000.

🌟 Top Firms for Associate Pay

• Kirkland & Ellis, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, and Quinn Emanuel top the list with associate compensation around $575,000.
• Skadden Arps and Davis Polk follow at $560,000, while Wachtell, Sullivan & Cromwell, Latham & Watkins, Paul Weiss, and Cleary Gottlieb hover near $550,000.

🏆 Partners: Unmatched Earnings Power

• Kirkland & Ellis leads with an average of $9.25 million in profits per equity partner.
• Wachtell Lipton follows closely at $9.04 million.
• Other powerhouse firms—including Quinn Emanuel, Sullivan & Cromwell, Skadden Arps, Latham, Davis Polk, Cravath, Cleary Gottlieb, and Paul Weiss—report partner earnings between $3.7 million and $5.4 million.

🔑 Why These Firms Stand Out

• Highly selective hiring from top law schools (T14), with preference for law review and federal clerkships.
• Heavy focus on high-stakes practice areas like M&A, private equity, litigation, and global transactions.
• Rigorous billable hour demands matched with market-leading rewards.

Learn more from this report: The Highest-Paying Law Firms in the United States

💡 For aspiring lawyers and seasoned associates alike, these firms represent the pinnacle of both prestige and financial reward in today’s legal market.

The post The Highest-Paying Law Firms in the U.S. Revealed first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

In a significant development, the Illinois Comptroller’s office has taken swift and decisive action, terminating the employment of legal counsel Sarah Chowdhury over her virulent antisemitic remarks made on the popular social media platform Instagram.

Immediate Termination Over Hate Speech

A spokesperson representing Illinois Comptroller Susana Mendoza confirmed the immediate firing of Sarah Chowdhury upon the office’s discovery of the disturbing exchange on Instagram. Chowdhury reportedly admitted to some of the posts, leaving the office with no choice but to sever ties. The spokesperson emphasized Comptroller Mendoza’s unwavering commitment to a zero-tolerance policy regarding antisemitism and hate speech.

No Comment from Chowdhury

As of now, Sarah Chowdhury has not issued any comments or statements regarding the termination, leaving her side of the story undisclosed.

Make informed decisions in real time. Subscribe to JDJournal and be in the know with the latest legal updates.

South Asian Bar Association of Chicago Takes Action

The South Asian Bar Association of Chicago also reacted swiftly, releasing a statement in which they revealed the immediate termination of Chowdhury from her role as president of the organization. They expressed deep sadness and horror over the offensive language used by Chowdhury and apologized for any harm it may have caused to friends, families, and colleagues.

Antisemitic Remarks on Instagram

The incident unfolded when Sarah Chowdhury engaged in a series of antisemitic remarks on Instagram with an account known as “Big Law Boiz.” Screenshots of the private conversation were shared publicly by the account owner. The derogatory comments included phrases like “All you Zionists will pay” and “Hitler should have eradicated all of you.”

Provocation Over the Israel Conflict

The owner of the Big Law Boiz account, who identified as “a Jew with Israeli family,” shared that Chowdhury had initiated the exchange in response to posts concerning media coverage of the ongoing conflict in Israel. The comments’ nature and offensive content swiftly caught public attention, prompting the necessary actions taken by the Illinois Comptroller’s office and the South Asian Bar Association of Chicago.

Want to know if you’re earning what you deserve? Find out with LawCrossing’s salary surveys.

Office Composition and Impact

Illinois Comptroller’s office, responsible for managing the state’s fiscal affairs, maintained a legal team, consisting of four legal counsels, including Sarah Chowdhury, as per state employment records. Her removal from this legal team marks a significant move by the office in response to the incident.

This incident serves as a reminder of the importance of maintaining a high standard of conduct and decorum, especially in public office and professional associations, to promote a culture of respect and inclusion.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

The post Illinois Comptroller Fires Attorney Over Virulent Antisemitic Remarks on Instagram first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Houston Bankruptcy Judge Steps Down Following Ethical Concerns Over Relationship with Lawyer Linked to Financial Benefits

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge David R. Jones has tendered his resignation due to an ethics complaint alleging an “intimate relationship” with a lawyer with financial interests tied to cases within his jurisdiction. This development follows the recent filing of an ethics complaint by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals chief judge in New Orleans on October 13th, as reported by the Wall Street Journal and Reuters.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Living Arrangements and Conflict of Interest

• The ethics complaint revealed that Judge David R. Jones and lawyer Elizabeth Freeman had shared a residence since approximately 2017.
• Elizabeth Freeman was previously a partner at the Houston bankruptcy law firm Jackson Walker until December 2022, when she established her law firm, the Law Office of Liz Freeman.
• Jackson Walker frequently represented clients before Judge Jones in bankruptcy cases, and substantial fees were approved for the firm.
• Although Elizabeth Freeman was not the official counsel in these cases, she did work on some of them, and the fees requested for her services were significant.
• Notably, Judge Jones did not recuse himself from cases involving Jackson Walker and failed to disclose his relationship with Freeman to the parties or their counsel.
• The ethics complaint also concerns Judge Jones approving a fee application from the law firm that Freeman founded in December.

Recusal Motion and Mediator Appointment

• In one instance, a recusal motion was filed based on Judge Jones’ alleged relationship with Elizabeth Freeman. He forwarded the motion to another bankruptcy judge without disclosing the nature of their relationship, as indicated by the ethics complaint.
• This motion was ultimately denied, and the denial was upheld on appeal by a district court judge unaware of the underlying relationship.
• Additionally, Judge Jones accepted an appointment to serve as a mediator in a case where Freeman was the attorney of record for one of the parties. The ethics complaint argues that the relationship was not disclosed.

Stay up-to-date without the overwhelming noise. Subscribe to JDJournal for a curated selection of the most relevant legal news.

Judge’s Response and Resignation

• Judge David R. Jones provided a statement to the Wall Street Journal, stating that he resigned due to his concern that his presence had “become a distraction to the good work” of the bankruptcy court.
• In a prior statement to the newspaper, he explained that he did not disclose his relationship with Freeman because they were not married and did not personally benefit from her work at Jackson Walker.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

The post Top Bankruptcy Judge Resigns Amidst Ethics Controversy first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Former President’s Lawyer Accuses New York Attorney General of Ignoring Facts

In a recent courtroom showdown, a lawyer representing Donald Trump leveled strong accusations against New York Attorney General Letitia James, asserting that she disregarded vital aspects of the case. The legal battle revolves around a civil lawsuit by James, alleging systematic fraud within Trump’s family business empire.

Trump’s Lawyer Fires Back

Christopher Kise, the legal representative for Donald Trump, made these allegations during a hearing in a New York state court. This contentious exchange unfolded just 10 days before the anticipated trial date on October 2. The central issue is whether the case should proceed, with Trump, his sons Donald Jr. and Eric, and the Trump Organization vehemently arguing that it should be dismissed outright. Their grounds for dismissal include the absence of fraud, a lack of harm inflicted, and the contention that the claims are too old-fashioned to be considered.

A Dueling Perspective

In contrast, Attorney General Letitia James is pushing for a pre-trial ruling to hold the defendants accountable for fraud. Justice Arthur Engoron presided over the hearing and is set to deliver his verdict on both sides’ motions on September 26. Engoron emphasized the broader principles: “We’re discussing fairness and honesty in the marketplace. The fact that nobody was hurt doesn’t mean the case gets dismissed.” James seeks substantial penalties of at least $250 million and the prohibition of Trump and his adult sons from operating businesses in New York.

Knowledge is power, and knowing your earning potential is no exception. Check out LawCrossing’s salary surveys to gain valuable insights.

Trump’s Political Landscape

Meanwhile, Donald Trump maintains a significant lead in the race for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination despite facing four criminal indictments to which he has pleaded not guilty. Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing, dismissing the cases as a partisan “witch hunt.”

Allegations of Financial Deceit

Central to the legal dispute are allegations that Trump misrepresented financial information from 2011 to 2021 to secure more favorable loan and insurance terms, resulting in financial institutions and insurers being defrauded. These falsehoods reportedly encompassed the overvaluation of properties such as Mar-a-Lago in Florida and Trump Tower’s penthouse in Manhattan, inflating Trump’s net worth by an estimated $3.6 billion.

Debate Over Evidence

Kise vehemently challenged the evidence presented, asserting that James’ counterarguments were insufficient to establish wrongdoing. He contended that disputes over property valuations were irrelevant, arguing, “The foundation of the case is to ignore everything. The case comes down to prosecuting the defendants for engaging in successful business transactions.” On the other hand, James claims that Trump knowingly provided false valuations.

Make informed decisions in real-time. Subscribe to JDJournal and be in the know with the latest legal updates.

Statute of Limitations

In June, a state appeals court in Manhattan dismissed several claims against Trump’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, and other allegations predating July 2014 or February 2016 due to statute of limitations restrictions. The court delegated the determination of which aspects of the case could proceed to Justice Engoron. Additionally, Engoron is set to rule on James’ request to penalize the defendants for repeatedly raising what he deemed “frivolous” arguments that had already been rejected.

Courtroom Tensions

During the recent hearing, tensions ran high as Judge Engoron expressed dissatisfaction with Kise’s suggestion that banks might not have relied on Trump’s valuations when granting loans. The judge firmly stated, “You cannot make false statements and use them in business,” punctuating his point with a resounding fist-bang.

Lawsuit Against the Judge

Last week, Donald Trump filed a lawsuit against Judge Engoron, alleging undue delays in narrowing down the case’s scope. The lawsuit seeks to postpone the trial to allow the defendants adequate preparation time once the judge decides which claims the attorney general can pursue. Furthermore, defense attorneys have accused Attorney General James of disregarding the June appeals court decision.

Awaiting the Appeals Court Decision

The looming question is whether the appeals court will decide next week whether the trial should proceed as scheduled. As both sides brace for the legal showdown ahead, the eyes of the nation remain fixed on this high-stakes legal battle.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

The post New York Lawsuit Against Donald Trump’s Business: Clash in Court first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Legal Consequences Unfold in Murdaugh-Linked Embezzlement Case

In a significant legal turn of events, Cory Fleming, a former South Carolina attorney and a close associate of Alex Murdaugh, was sentenced to a 20-year prison term. This sentencing comes on the heels of his admission of guilt in state charges connected to aiding the convicted murderer in siphoning off millions of dollars from unsuspecting clients.

The Verdict in Beaufort County

The judgment was handed down in a Beaufort County courtroom, marking the climax of a legal saga initiated when Fleming acknowledged his conspiracy with Murdaugh to defraud clients referred to him by the latter.

Misappropriation of Millions

The bulk of the misappropriated funds stemmed from an insurance settlement that Fleming facilitated for Gloria Satterfield’s estate. Satterfield, the Murdaugh family’s housekeeper, met a tragic end in a “trip-and-fall” incident at the Murdaugh residence in 2018. It’s important to note that an ongoing investigation has been launched to shed light on her untimely demise.

Whether you’re a recent law school grad or an experienced attorney, BCG Attorney Search has the job for you.

Charges in the Pinckney Case

Fleming also faced charges related to the diversion of funds intended for the family of Hakeem Pinckney, a victim of a severe car crash in 2009 who sadly passed away in 2011. Prosecutors assert that the settlement funds earmarked for the Pinckney and Satterfield families were rerouted to a fictitious bank account, subsequently utilized by Murdaugh and, at times, by Fleming himself.

Judge’s Stern Message

Judge Clifton Newman, presiding over the case, underscored the seriousness of Fleming’s actions. He emphasized that the disbarred attorney must “suffer the consequences of (his) actions.” Newman also highlighted that Fleming’s victims were “vulnerable people” who had trusted him as their legal representative.

Stay up-to-date without the overwhelming noise. Subscribe to JDJournal for a curated selection of the most relevant legal news.

Federal Sentence Looms

In addition to his state sentence, Fleming is serving a federal term of three years and 10 months after admitting guilt to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Under his plea agreement, he has committed to cooperating with both state and federal prosecutors. Notably, his state sentence is significantly more extensive, potentially resulting in over 15 additional years behind bars in a state prison once his federal sentence concludes—initially set to run concurrently.

Fleming’s Solemn Acknowledgment

In a moment of solemn reflection, Fleming, dressed in a striped prison jumpsuit and handcuffs, addressed the court. He took full responsibility for his actions, offering no excuses. He expressed deep disappointment in himself and acknowledged that the weight of remorse would be a constant companion throughout his life.

Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

The post Former South Carolina Attorney Cory Fleming Receives 20-Year Prison Sentence first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

On Wednesday, renowned attorney David Boies and several prominent legal professionals expressed concerns about the impact of incivility and politics on the United States legal system. Speaking at an event hosted by the conservative Federalist Society in Washington, D.C., Boies highlighted issues ranging from the judicial confirmation process to the criminal case against former President Donald Trump in New York.

Boies criticized the increasingly “toxic” nature of the process for confirming new federal judges, emphasizing that political considerations have come to dominate the selection rather than focusing on the suitability of candidates for non-controversial cases. As a former Senate Judiciary Committee lawyer, Boies stressed the need to prioritize the appointment of judges based on their ability to impartially handle both controversial and non-controversial cases.

The event also featured discussions on maintaining civility in the legal profession, with American Bar Association President Deborah Enix-Ross and prominent conservative lawyer Charles Cooper of Cooper & Kirk participating in the panel. Cooper, who represented the opposing side in the California gay marriage case, emphasized the importance of lawyers exhibiting respectful behavior even in contentious cases.

Boies, known for his involvement in high-profile political cases, expressed concerns about the indictment against Donald Trump, the former U.S. president and a potential candidate for the Republican nomination in 2024. He argued that the ongoing prosecution in New York contributes to the divisive atmosphere in American society and undermines the rule of law and public confidence in prosecutorial discretion. Boies suggested that there should be a higher threshold for charging a former president without further elaboration.

Connect with qualified, experienced attorneys by submitting your job openings with BCG Attorney Search.

The charges against Trump involve allegations of falsifying business records to conceal pre-election payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels, who claimed to have had a sexual encounter with Trump. Trump has pleaded not guilty and accused prosecutors of having political motivations. Legal experts have raised questions about the decision to elevate what would typically be a misdemeanor offense to a felony charge, as prosecutors have alluded to the involvement of a second crime without specifying it. The additional offense may include potential violations of tax and election laws.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has defended the case, asserting that it aligns with the typical approach taken in white-collar prosecutions by his office. While a spokesperson for Bragg’s office declined to comment on Boies’ remarks, the attorney’s concerns add to the ongoing debate surrounding the case and its potential implications for the legal system.

Despite Boies’ reputation for his liberal advocacy and past trial successes, his recent work for figures like Harvey Weinstein, the former Hollywood producer convicted of rape, and Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes has drawn criticism. These controversies have sparked discussions about the intersection of personal beliefs and professional responsibilities within the legal field.

As legal professionals continue to navigate a challenging landscape influenced by politics and incivility, the warnings raised by Boies and others serve as a reminder of the importance of upholding the principles of justice, fairness, and respectful conduct within the legal profession. The discussions surrounding the judicial confirmation process and ongoing legal cases demonstrate the ongoing need for thoughtful and unbiased decision-making to preserve the integrity and public trust in the U.S. legal system.

The post Prominent Attorney Boies Raises Alarm over Harmful Impact of Politics on Legal Practice first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

William E. Gericke, a former attorney at Cozen O’Connor, has agreed to a one-year suspension of his law license in Pennsylvania for using information he learned as a conflicts attorney to buy stock before a merger. Gericke was suspended by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Monday.

Gericke, who is now 61 years old, earned a profit of $10,000 by trading in the stock of firm client Liberty Property Trust. According to the joint petition for discipline, Gericke bought the stock in October 2019 after a tax partner asked Gericke to run a conflicts check on another company, Prologis, before a possible merger with Liberty Property Trust.

Gericke left Cozen O’Connor in August 2021. The law firm previously stated that Gericke’s alleged conduct violated the law and the firm’s policies and procedures. The firm told Law.com, “When we became aware of Mr. Gericke’s activity, we took prompt and appropriate action, including cooperating with the SEC. We are glad that this matter has been resolved and that the former employee’s behavior resulted in no harm to our client.”

In an interview with representatives of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Gericke later acknowledged that his purchase violated SEC rules. As part of a settlement with the SEC in November 2021, Gericke paid a $20,000 fine.

Let us help you advance your legal career – submit your resume to BCG Attorney Search now.

Gericke’s suspension will take effect on April 19, 2023. According to Law.com, Gericke joined Dugan, Brinkmann, Maginnis, and Pace after leaving Cozen O’Connor, but he is not currently listed as a lawyer on the new firm’s website.

Gericke’s lawyer, Josh J.T. Byrne, did not immediately respond to an email request for comment.

Conflicts of interest are a serious issue in the legal profession, and lawyers must avoid situations where their interests may conflict with their clients. It is common for lawyers to be asked to perform conflict checks, especially when a client is considering a merger or acquisition. These checks help ensure that the lawyer has no conflicts of interest that could potentially harm the client’s interests.

In this case, Gericke’s conduct violated legal and ethical rules and faced significant consequences. While Gericke’s actions did not ultimately harm the client, the fact that he used confidential information to make a personal profit is a severe breach of trust.

Gericke’s suspension reminds us that lawyers must always act in their client’s best interests and avoid conflicts of interest at all costs. It also underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in the legal profession and the need for lawyers to uphold high ethical standards in their professional activities.

The post BigLaw Attorney Suspended for Trading on Insider Information as Conflicts Counsel first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Heather Palmore, a former employee of the law firm Napoli Shkolnik, is being sued by her former employer for “quite quitting” her job and working two jobs remotely, one of which was at her law firm. The law firm’s complaint also accuses Palmore of attempting to extort money from the firm by making false claims of discrimination without any factual basis. Palmore fired back, filing a federal complaint fleshing out those allegations of racial and disability discrimination and alleging the firm’s lawsuit was retaliatory and designed to preempt the discrimination lawsuit.

In advance of a motion to dismiss, which the current filing promises are coming, Palmore has filed a motion to quash the non-party subpoenas already served in action and/or issue a protective order in the state action. Palmore’s legal team has also requested sanctions, characterizing the state action as a problematic use of the court system. According to the filing, the lawsuit was filed only after Napoli Shkolnik begged Palmore not to file her lawsuit so that the parties could mediate, only for Napoli Shkolnik to use that time to cobble together a fraudulent complaint to file against her preemptively.

Palmore’s legal team characterizes the no-notice subpoenas of former employers as harassing and disfavored under New York law. The team argues that the subpoenas are intrusive and seek a broad array of documents without bearing on the litigation. They are an attempt to tarnish Palmore’s professional standing and reputation. The request for sanctions argues that the court should find that the issuance of the subpoenas was intended to “harass or maliciously injure” Palmore and that Napoli Shkolnik’s conduct must be deterred in the strongest possible terms.

Lucas Markowitz, attorney for Napoli Shkolnik, commented on the matter, stating that the firm is focused on getting to the truth while Palmore seeks media appearances. Palmore’s legal team argues that the former employer subpoenas are being used to harass and intimidate her and that Palmore is deleting her Facebook posts about the case.

Let LawCrossing help you achieve your full potential – sign up today.

This legal back-and-forth between Napoli Shkolnik and Palmore has become messy, with both parties making serious allegations against each other. The case is now where Palmore is fighting back, seeking to quash non-party subpoenas already served in action and/or issue a protective order in the state action. The request for sanctions argues that Napoli Shkolnik’s conduct must be deterred in the strongest possible terms. The firm is accused of using the court system to harass and defame Palmore for asserting claims of discrimination and retaliation against them.

The legal battle between Palmore and Napoli Shkolnik is still ongoing, and it is still being determined how the court will rule on the motions and requests for sanctions. However, this case serves as a reminder that legal disputes can quickly become complicated and emotional, with both sides making serious allegations against each other. In such situations, having an experienced legal team on your side is crucial to help navigate the complex legal system and fight for your rights.

The post Attorney Faces Lawsuit for ‘Quiet Quitting’ Law Firm Job, Fights Back with Sanctions Request first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

A South Florida attorney turned a lot of heads recently when he went to a federal courthouse wearing a full, disposable hazmat suit that he had obtained from a friend who sells medical supplies.

Miami based lawyer Samuel J. Rabin Jr. was on his way to the federal courthouse for his client’s sentencing hearing and decided he was not about to risk spreading or catching COVID-19.

Rabin wore a full hazmat suit, respirator, gloves, mask and face shield, and as he was walking toward the courthouse, police officers pulled up and asked: “Is there something we should be worrying about?” Inside the courthouse, security officers and marshals told him, “I don’t blame you, man!”

While Rabin had the option of appearing for the hearing via Zoom, he thought the sentencing was too delicate to do online, especially after failing to meet the client to go over his presentence investigation report.

That’s because, at sentencing, clients often need to confer with their lawyers about any issues that arise.

“A sentencing is the most important stage of a person’s life that’s facing a criminal case, and I just think a lawyer has an ethical obligation to be standing there with them,” Rabin told LAW.com. “Every defendant wants to talk to the judge and give his feelings, so I wanted to be there in case he had any questions or in case he wanted to talk to me before he spoke to the judge.”

Rabin’s friend Michael Schlesinger of the Schlesinger Law Group shared a photo of Rabin in the disposable hazmat suit that appeared on Twitter, LinkedIn, and the Southern District of Florida Blog, with the title “Sam Rabin is a legend.”

Rabin received several outfit tips for next time by onlookers, like adding a tie to the suit.

“It would have been a nice touch if he had worn a tie on the outside of the hazmat suit,” Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Miguel M. de la O commented on Twitter.

Rabin decided to take the extreme precautions amid rising concerns in South Florida about inmate safety.

In the end, Rabin secured approval for the sentence his client agreed to. Although he’s not planning on returning to the courtroom anytime soon, Rabin said he would bring the hazmat back for an encore if necessary.

“The judge had no issue with me wearing it,” the attorney said. “She understood, quite frankly, and wasn’t upset about it in any way.”

The post Florida Lawyer Wears Full Hazmat Suit to Court first appeared on JDJournal Blog.