The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments on April 16 in a case that highlights the legal complexities surrounding the charges against January 6 Capitol riot defendants. The case underscores a clash between concerns over prosecutorial discretion and a strict interpretation of statutory language.

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

The Legal Issue at Hand

The central question revolves around whether the Justice Department overreached by invoking an Enron-era statute in charging some Capitol riot defendants. This statute, designed to combat evidence destruction, carries severe penalties of up to 20 years in prison.

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

Arguments Against Prosecutorial Discretion

Critics argue that the Justice Department misapplied the law, stretching its scope to prosecute defendants from the January 6 riot. Former President Donald Trump, among others, faces charges under this statute. Critics contend that such charges are unwarranted and represent prosecutorial overreach.

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

Legal Precedents and Interpretation

Supporters of the defendants point to legal precedents that caution against broad interpretations of statutes. They argue that the law in question was crafted in response to specific financial scandals and is ill-suited for cases like the Capitol riot. Previous Supreme Court rulings, such as Yates v. United States, highlight the importance of interpreting laws within their intended context.

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

Defense and Prosecution Perspectives

Defense attorneys argue that the rioters couldn’t have foreseen facing such severe charges for their actions. However, prosecutors maintain that the defendants’ conduct falls within the broad language of the statute, which prohibits any corrupt obstruction of official proceedings.

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

The Supreme Court’s Dilemma

The case presents a dilemma for the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, balancing concerns over prosecutorial discretion with a strict adherence to statutory language. How the justices navigate these competing interests will have significant implications for the prosecution of January 6 defendants and future cases involving similar legal issues.

Uncover exclusive insights and strategic approaches through the State of the Lateral Law Firm Legal Market 2024—an in-depth report delving into the intricate patterns and current trends within the lateral law firm market.

Looking Ahead

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments, legal experts and observers await the outcome of Fischer v. United States, which will provide clarity on the application of the law in cases stemming from the January 6 Capitol riot.

The post Legal Battle Over Jan. 6 Charges first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

A former partner at the now-closed law firm Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis is embroiled in legal trouble as an amended lawsuit accuses him of making secret recordings with hidden cameras.

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

Allegations Unveiled

The lawsuit, filed by Christine Fortuna of Philadelphia, alleges that Robert McKinley, residing in Villas, New Jersey, secretly recorded individuals, including Fortuna, in bathrooms or guest rooms at his residences in New Jersey. The lawsuit seeks damages for invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress.

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

Criminal Charges and Arrest

McKinley’s legal woes intensified with his arrest in April 2022 on charges of manufacturing child pornography and possessing child sexual abuse material. According to reports, McKinley was accused of secretly recording at least seven girls at his home. The criminal charges are still pending.

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

Involvement of Lauletta Birnbaum

The lawsuit also names Lauletta Birnbaum, a New Jersey firm where McKinley joined in 2014. It alleges that McKinley transmitted the videos through firm servers and stored them on a Dropbox account affiliated with the firm. Lauletta Birnbaum terminated McKinley’s employment following his arrest.

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

Work History and Response

McKinley’s work history, summarized from his now-deleted LinkedIn profile, includes stints at various law firms. Lauletta Birnbaum, responding to the allegations, expressed sympathy for the victims but denied any prior knowledge of McKinley’s alleged misconduct during his association with the firm.

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

No Immediate Response

McKinley has not responded to requests for comment, neither to the ABA Journal nor to Law.com. His silence adds to the complexity of the allegations and legal proceedings surrounding the case.

The post Allegations of Secret Recordings: Former Schnader Harrison Partner Faces Lawsuit first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Lawyers representing Donald Trump have made a plea to the Supreme Court, seeking a temporary halt to a ruling that dismissed his argument of immunity against criminal charges related to his actions to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. Trump’s legal team emphasized the gravity of the situation, asserting that without such immunity, the essence of the presidency would be fundamentally altered.

Legal Battle Escalates: Trump’s Appeal to Supreme Court

The recent decision by a three-judge panel in the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., unanimously rejecting Trump’s claim of immunity, has escalated the legal battle. If implemented, this ruling would end Trump’s efforts to dismiss special counsel Jack Smith’s case, prompting a restart of legal proceedings in the federal district court in D.C.

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

Trump’s Defense Argument: Protecting Presidential Immunity

In their application to the Supreme Court, Trump’s defense team argued vehemently for a pause in proceedings, highlighting the necessity of preserving the ordinary appellate procedures. They emphasized the unprecedented nature of the case and underscored the need for careful consideration by the highest court, stating that Trump’s immunity claim raises significant and novel questions.

Potential Ramifications: Threats to Presidential Powers

Trump’s lawyers warned against the repercussions of subjecting a former president to criminal prosecution for official acts, foreseeing detrimental effects on future presidencies. They expressed concerns about the potential disruption to Trump’s ability to campaign against President Joe Biden. They argued that the appeals court’s ruling posed an immediate threat to First Amendment interests.

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

Implications of the Appeals Court Ruling

Last week’s ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the decision of U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, denying Trump’s claim of absolute presidential immunity. The appellate judges affirmed that while Trump held presidential office, he enjoyed certain protections, but those privileges did not shield him from prosecution post-presidency.

Legal Precedents and Challenges

Trump’s legal team has invoked the Constitution’s separation-of-powers doctrine to support their argument for immunity, contending that it prevents the courts from reviewing a president’s official acts. However, the appeals court rejected this argument, emphasizing that Trump’s stance would undermine the foundational principles of the U.S. government.

The Road Ahead: Pending Supreme Court Decision

The outcome of Trump’s appeal to the Supreme Court remains uncertain. The application for a stay keeps the case in limbo until a decision is reached. With the composition of the Supreme Court, including three justices appointed by Trump, the legal battle is poised to unfold against the backdrop of deeply polarized political dynamics.

Continuing Legal Battles: Trump’s Criminal Charges

Beyond the specific case at hand, Trump faces multiple criminal charges, including conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and obstructing Congress’s certification of Biden’s victory. These charges and others signify an ongoing legal saga with profound implications for Trump’s political future and the broader landscape of American governance.

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

The post Trump Requests Supreme Court Intervention to Halt Criminal Prosecution first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Jeremy Pauley’s Admission

Pauley admitted his involvement in the illicit trade of stolen human remains, acknowledging that he knowingly purchased such remains from multiple individuals who acquired them through theft. Moreover, he confessed to reselling these stolen remains to others, at least one of whom was aware of their illicit origin.

Get ahead of the competition by submitting your resume to LawCrossing – don’t wait any longer!

Co-conspirators and Their Activities

Several other individuals were previously indicted on charges related to this conspiracy and interstate transport of stolen property:

1. Cedric Lodge, aged 55, who managed the morgue for the Anatomical Gifts Program at Harvard Medical School, was implicated in stealing organs and body parts from corpses donated for medical research and education. He then transported these stolen remains from Boston to his residence in Goffstown, New Hampshire, along with his wife, Denise Lodge, who was also involved in the sale of the stolen remains. These illicit transactions often occur through cellular phone communication and social media websites.
2. Katrina Maclean and Joshua Taylor, among others, were recipients of the stolen remains and allegedly sold them for profit, including to Jeremy Pauley in the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
3. Candace Chapman Scott, an employee at a Little Rock, Arkansas, mortuary and crematorium, was indicted for stealing cadaver parts she was supposed to cremate. She also stole the corpses of two stillborn babies intended for cremation and sale as cremains to their families. Scott’s stolen remains found their way to Pauley in Pennsylvania.
4. Matthew Lampi was another individual involved in the trade of stolen human remains, engaging in transactions with Pauley and exchanging over $100,000 in online payments.

Busy schedule? No problem. Subscribe to JDJournal for bite-sized legal news updates that fit your on-the-go lifestyle.

Ongoing Legal Proceedings

Those charged in connection with this investigation are currently awaiting trial:

• Cedric Lodge, Goffstown, New Hampshire (age 55)
• Katrina Maclean, Salem, Massachusetts (age 44)
• Joshua Taylor, West Lawn, Pennsylvania (age 46)
• Denise Lodge, Goffstown, New Hampshire (age 63)
• Mathew Lampi, East Bethel, Minnesota (age 52)

Candace Chapman-Scott has also been indicted in federal court in the District of Arkansas for her involvement in the conspiracy and defrauding her employer.

Legal Consequences

The maximum penalty under federal law for the offenses in question is 15 years of imprisonment, supervised release, and fines. Sentencing will be determined by the presiding judge, considering federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

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

The post Federal Guilty Plea in Multi-State Conspiracy to Traffic Stolen Human Remains first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Rudy Giuliani, the former Mayor of New York and one-time attorney to Donald Trump is facing mounting legal fees reaching millions of dollars. To alleviate this financial burden, Giuliani is set to headline a high-stakes fundraising event at Trump’s Bedminster golf club.

Raising Millions Amid Legal Troubles

Amid a series of lawsuits and criminal charges from his post-2020 election actions, Giuliani aims to raise over $1 million for his legal defense fund during this exclusive fundraiser, where each plate costs $100,000. This event is the first of two fundraisers Trump is backing for Giuliani.

Giuliani’s son, Andrew Giuliani, acknowledges that the event won’t cover all legal expenses but highlights its importance in assembling a solid legal team to combat what many view as politically motivated prosecutions.

Allies Seek Donations, Trump’s Role in Funding

Giuliani’s allies actively solicited donations, targeting individuals who’ve benefited from his assistance and high-dollar donors. However, these efforts have not yielded substantial results compared to Giuliani’s considerable debt.

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

The fundraiser spotlights a divide within Trump’s circle regarding his financial support for Giuliani. While some advise Trump to assist his longtime ally, others recommend distancing himself from Giuliani’s legal challenges.

High Legal Costs and Pending Criminal Charges

Giuliani faces daunting legal expenses, estimated at up to $5 million, primarily due to defamation lawsuits related to false election fraud claims. Recent rulings and pending damages further add to his financial woes.

Moreover, Giuliani confronts criminal charges in Fulton County, Georgia, related to allegations of election interference. The associated legal fees could amount to millions as a lengthy trial with over 150 witnesses looms.

Stay ahead in the legal game! Subscribe to JDJournal for hassle-free access to the latest legal news in your inbox.

Trump’s Support and Giuliani’s Resilience

Trump has provided financial assistance, including covering Giuliani’s debt to a data-hosting company. Despite the ongoing debate within Trump’s advisory circle, Giuliani demonstrates his resilience in adversity.

Andrew Giuliani underscores his father’s willingness to confront the charges and thrives amidst the chaos, drawing parallels between Giuliani and Trump’s shared resilience in challenging situations.

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

The post Rudy Giuliani’s Legal Battles and Trump’s Fundraising Efforts – A Closer Look first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Jay Edelson, who is representing clients in a fraud and racketeering lawsuit against Girardi Keese and its principals, expressed confidence in the federal prosecutors handling the case and commented that this is a “bad day for plaintiff’s lawyers who are doing unethical things and a horrible day for the California Bar.” The bar has received over 200 complaints about Girardi over the years, with nearly 60 alleging client trust account violations.

Ruben Duran, chair of the California Bar Board of Trustees, acknowledged the seriousness of the abuse and misconduct that led to Girardi’s disbarment and stated that the bar is committed to ensuring that this type of misconduct never happens again. State Senate Judiciary Chairman Thomas Umberg proposed legislation requiring lawyers to report other attorneys for professional misconduct that raises questions about their honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as an attorney.

However, despite the numerous complaints, some have criticized the bar for its failure to take action against Girardi. Carol Langford, a law professor specializing in ethics, asked why prosecutors aren’t also investigating bar personnel who failed to supervise their employees and who must have been aware of the complaints. A legal ethics expert, Robert Hillman, commented that the indictments reinforce the bar’s failure to act and illustrate “how bad things can get when there is a bad seed in the profession.”

In conclusion, the recent criminal indictments of Thomas Girardi and employees of his firm have raised concerns about the reputation of the California State Bar and its ability to regulate and discipline attorneys. While the bar has taken steps to address these serious issues, the failure to take action against Girardi despite numerous complaints raises questions about its effectiveness. The proposed legislation by Thomas Umberg may help to prevent similar cases in the future, but more needs to be done to restore confidence in the profession and prevent unethical behavior by lawyers.

REFERENCES:

Girardi Criminal Charges Also Impugn California Bar, Critics Say

The post Girardi Criminal Charges Raise Concerns for California Bar Reputation first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: Prosecutors that don’t play by the rules are not being held accountable for the crimes so some care speaking up and calling for a change.

Glenn Kurtzrock was a homicide prosecutor in Suffolk County, New York. In May 2017, he was caught hiding evidence from the case of a young man charged with first-degree murder. Further investigation determined that Kurtzrock concealed materials from several other cases. He was fired but never faced any criminal charges for his conduct, according to an opinion piece by The New York Times.

Messiah Booker was adamant that he was innocent. He spent 18 months in jail waiting for his trial. His defense lawyer then realized what Kurtzrock had done and turned him in. Hundreds of pages of police records had been altered to remove an abundance of exculpatory information, including another suspect. Kurtzrock even removed the covers of two police notebooks to make the altered documents look like the originals.

The district attorney quickly fired Kurtzrock. The charges were dropped against Booker mid-trial. Booker ended up pleading guilty to attempted robbery. The judge referred to the case as a “travesty.” Even though Kurtzrock violated the 1963 Supreme Court ruling of Brady v. Maryland, which requires prosecutors to reveal any exculpatory evidence to defendants, nothing happened to Kurtzrock.

The district attorney’s office went through the rest of Kurtzrock’s case files and found four other murder convictions that were tainted by his concealment of evidence. All four of those convictions have been overturned. One of the cases involved Shaun Laurence, who had been sentenced for 75 years of life for murder. In his case, Kurtzrock concealed 45 different items of exculpatory evidence during the trial. The judge in this case called Kurtzrock’s misconduct, “absolutely stunning.”

So with five murder convictions now overturned, Kurtzrock is now working as a private practice defense attorney. He was never suspended, sanctioned, or subject to any punishment for his actions. He is now representing people accused of crimes in the same courthouse he was supposed to be banished from just a year ago. His law firm website even brags about his experience as a “former homicide prosecutor.”

Perhaps even more troubling is that the law makes it pretty much impossible for the victims to sue Kurtzrock. The Supreme Court ruled that individual prosecutors and their offices “immune” from civil rights lawsuits except for in very rare circumstances.

The University of California, Irvine runs the National Registry of Exonerations. They report that “official misconduct” by prosecutors, police, or both was a factor in nearly half of the exonerations since 1989. Only one prosecutor had been jailed for misconduct that led to a wrongful conviction. Ken Anderson served eight days in county jail.

Another case from last June in Massachusetts found that two former assistant attorney generals failed to disclose that a former state lab analyst was addicted to drugs while on the job for years. The 127-page decision by a Massachusetts judge found they committed “fraud on the court” and “egregious misconduct.” Five years of litigation led to the state throwing out over 8,000 drug convictions that had been tainted by laboratory and prosecutorial misconduct. The two former assistant attorney generals were never punished and are still licensed attorneys.

The New York State Senate passed a bill last week that would require reforms to regulate prosecutors’ conduct and law licenses. If the bill gets passed, New York will be the first state to create such conditions. The opinion article believes that an elected district attorney who is unwilling to criminally charge an assistant prosecutor who deliberately violates the law would then justify an attorney general or governor to step in and appoint a special prosecutor. The article contends that there are enough prosecutors committed to fair practice and those that aren’t put a strain on the profession and their colleagues.

Should everyone be accountable for their actions regardless of their position? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.

To learn more about others you got away with their crimes, read these articles:

• Man Slaps Crying Toddler and Calls Him Racist Epithet on Delta Flight only to Lose His Job
• No Jail Time for Madam Who Ran Coffee-Stand Brothels
• UC Berkeley Law Lets Sujit Choudhry Off Easy for Sexual Harassment Claim

Photo: flickr.com

The post Do Prosecutors Who Break the Law Get Off Easy? first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission released some details of the settlement with two former Dewey & LeBoeuf executives.

Two former Dewey & LeBoeuf executives made settlements with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, with the details now being released. Law.com reported on the details on the settlement that were released by the SEC with Stephen DiCarmine and Joel Sanders.

The settlement agreement with the former executive director DiCarmine requires him to pay a $35,000 civil penalty. Sanders, the former Chief Financial Officer, agreed to a partial settlement. He is prohibited from serving as an officer or director of a public company plus there is a possibility he could be fined at a future time.

The SEC previously announced that there were tentative settlements with the two former executives, moving on Monday to realize the details of the proposed settlements. They are just waiting for approval from U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni of the Southern District of New York.

In a trial against the Dewey executives after the firm collapsed in 2012, DiCarmine was acquitted of criminal charges but Sanders was found guilty of scheming to defraud, securities fraud and conspiracy charges. He was able to avoid jail time but must pay a $1 million fine and complete 750 hours of community service.

The executives were accused of lying to banks and investors about the state of the law firm. The SEC brought the civil charges against them for securities violations at the same time as the criminal charges filed by prosecutors in 2014. Settlements with the other former executives, like the ex-chairman Steven Davis, former finance chairman Francis Canellas, and ex-controller Thomas Mullikin, are still in the works. These former executives have made partial settlements, meaning they settled on liability but not damages. The SEC can still pursue sanctions against them as disgorgement, civil, and interest penalties. SEC attorney Howard Fischer said in a letter that they “intend to do so.”

An order from February is waiting for a motion schedule set by Caproni for the damages against Mullikin, Canellas, Sanders, and Davis.

DiCarmine was represented by Michael King, a solo practitioner formerly with Locke Lord. Sanders was represented by Brian Miller, Akerman’s securities litigation chairman.

Do you think the settlements are fair? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.

To learn more about the legal cases against the Dewey executives, read these articles:

• Dewey & LeBoeuf Exec Joel Sanders Convicted of Securities Fraud
• Dewey and LeBoeuf Execs Cleared of Some Counts
• Former Dewey & LeBoeuf Partner Jumps to His Death off of New York High-Rise

Photo: law.com

The post Settlement Details with Two Former Dewey Execs Released by SEC first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: An East Shore attorney has been accused of embezzling and burglarizing her own law firm, among other charges.

East Shore attorney Nichole A. Collins had more charges filed against her related to embezzling and burglarizing her own law firm. The additional 20 criminal charges filed by investigators put her legal problems into a new category, according to Penn Live.

Collins, formerly of Shaffer & Engle, had the new charges added to the original charges of burglary, theft, forgery, receiving stolen property, access device fraud, and criminal mischief filed by the state attorney general’s office in January. They are pursuing the case since Collins’ husband, Joel Hogentogler, is the deputy district attorney for Dauphin County. They referred the case to state investigators to handle.

The new charges filed Tuesday came when the 35-year-old attorney waived her preliminary hearing for the original charges. This sent that case to Dauphin County Court where she is set for arraignment in June. Special Agent Jessica Eger explained the cases filed with District Judge James A. Lenker. Eger said the charges include one count of theft by failure to make required disposition of funds, one count of impersonating a notary, one count of tampering with public records, one count of performing an action in furtherance of a false pretense, one count of unlawful use of a computer, one count of misapplication of entrusted property, two counts of receiving stolen property, two counts of securing execution of documents by deception, three counts of theft by unlawful taking, four counts of identity theft, and four counts of forgery.

Investigators believe the crimes were committed last year when she had been with Shaffer & Engle for almost three years. Collins would make false claims of legal expenses to the firm but pocketed the money. Eger said an example of this is a $385 check that Collins would write out to her husband but record in the firm’s cost account ledger as a check written to Lebanon County prothonotary. She did this at least 14 times.

Another example was an entry Collins made in the cost account ledger for the filings of divorce papers for a client but the client was not even married. The law firm’s principals, Jeff Engle and Elisabeth Pasqualini confronted Collins about it. She allegedly told them they should add $850 to the amount they thought she had stolen.

Another accusation against Collins is that she forged the signature of the opposing attorney’s client during divorce proceedings so his property could be sold for $30,000 less than he was seeking. She forged his signature and then used her law firms in-house notary stamp.

In other instances. Collins did not turn over payments clients made to her. One client claimed Collins told her she would get a double payment credit if she gave Collins a partial payment in cash. Collins was taking payments from clients but failing to deposit the money into the firm’s accounts even though she was marking the clients’ accounts as paid in full, although some clients still owed thousands of dollars to the firm. Eger noted a time that a client gave Collins $5,500 in cash so she marked his account as paid even though he owed $12,781.

Shaffer & Engle claim they have lost $97,000 from payments they should have received from clients. Collins made about $32,500 from the scheme.

Do you think Collins should ever be allowed to be an attorney again? What kind of punishment should she get? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below.

To learn more about attorneys accused of stealing, read these articles:

• Former Schaumburg Attorney Stole from Clients, Including Own Uncle
• Attorney Robert Beck Stole from Clients to Fund Lavish Lifestyle
• Attorney James Grant King Pleads Not Guilty to Theft

Cover Photo: avvo.com

Collins Photo: dandb.com

The post Attorney Nichole A. Collins Charged with Embezzlement and Burglarizing first appeared on JDJournal Blog.

Summary: The former clients of Andy Allman are waiting in limbo as one county is waiting for another county to possibly file criminal charges against the thieving attorney.

This Tennessee lawyer is the kind that gives lawyers a bad rap. The Board of Professional Responsibility fears that Sumner County lawyer Andy Allman may have up to 400 victims to his deception and theft schemes. He is accused of stealing and cheating 71 clients but bankruptcy documents indicate there may be more victims.

Allman is currently in bankruptcy court after he lost his law license last November from the slew of complaints and a felony theft charge. He is accused of stealing from clients, some of which even included close friends.

Allman has still not faced a trial for the charges, something his former clients are getting frustrated about. Cathy Brown had been a client of Allman until he stole roughly $230,000 from her. The money from her deceased estate was supposed to be used for the care of her nephew, Baylor Bramble.

Bramble suffered a brain injury during a high school football game. He was 16 at the time of the accident, two years ago. His father explained, “He tapped himself out. Took his helmet off. He just collapsed.” Bramble suffered from a brain bleed that “pushed or herniated the brain” and likely came from multiple hits during practices and the game. Doctors didn’t expect the boy to live more than a few days but he has pushed back with the help of a lot of therapy.

The money Allman stole from them was supposed to go towards the best treatment options for Bramble but instead, the family does what they can from their garage. His mom quit her job so she could take care of him. Brown explained, “[Allman’s] still dining in the country club, heading out on his boat as far as I know, but where is the money coming from?”

Allman’s trial date in Davidson County has been pushed back even further to May 2018 while they wait for possible criminal charges from Sumner County. Brown said her family feels like he got a “get out of jail card free because [he has] done do so many bad things, so frustrating.”

The only victory so far in the case is that an attorney for one victim, Steven Lefkovitz, has been able to stop the despicable attorney from getting away with everything. Allman declared bankruptcy but then tried to go back out. He filed without an attorney and without notifying his creditors. Now his former clients are listing themselves as creditors so it will be harder for him to get out of paying them back.

Allman appealed the judge’s ruling to keep him in bankruptcy but Lefkovitz objected. Lefkovitz said, “My response was ‘Andy, you have given me the keys to the kingdom.’ While he is in bankruptcy, I have access to all his financial records and have subpoena power in any matter or situation regarding his finances. Andy turned on the water and put his toe in…now it is time for him to take a bath.”

At this time there are 400 files against him in bankruptcy court. With so much to go through, Lefkovitz wants a forensic audit to go over Allman’s finances.

He also pleaded the fifth when asked to explain himself and the allegations against him.

Do you think a freeze should be placed on all of his accounts until his clients can be repaid? Tell us your thoughts in the comments below.

To learn more about attorney’s taking the fifth, read these articles:

• Margo E. Burson Takes the Fifth During Disciplinary Hearing
• Judge Recommends Disbarment of Three Attorneys in DUI Scandal
• Lois Lerner to Plead the Fifth Over the IRS Scandal Wednesday

Photo: youtube.com

The post Andy Allman’s Former Clients Still Waiting for Criminal Charges against Him first appeared on JDJournal Blog.