Legal Ethics

Do As We Say, Not As We Do

The black eye the profession has once again due to the escapades of a lawyer who had been well-respected in the Los Angeles legal community for years is quite aggravating.

By  
on

Thomas Girardi

The antics (and I think that’s the proper word to use) of the State Bar of California fascinate me. I can’t avert my eyes from its latest train wreck.

The most recent fiasco giving the bar a black eye is the righteous furor over of the conduct of Tom Girardi, a well-known plaintiff’s tort lawyer here in Los Angeles. For those who don’t know who Tom Girardi is, he’s the husband of Erika Jayne, one of the Real Housewives of Beverly Hills. (No matter that the Girardis don’t live in Beverly Hills or even close to there, remember it’s Hollywood.)

But what isn’t Hollywood and is all too real is the ethics/morality play that the bar finds itself in. Girardi allegedly made off with settlement funds due to plaintiffs he represented in several cases. When asked about payment, he stalled, didn’t respond to legitimate discovery requests, promised to pay (you know, the old “check is in the mail” saying) and wound up in the crosshairs of the federal district court in Chicago which, among other things, has referred Girardi to the United States Attorney’s Office in Chicago for possible criminal charges.

Girardi’s brother has filed for conservatorship of Girardi, saying he has Alzheimer’s and is unable to understand what is going on. Pardon my skepticism.

That’s the same reason that former Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca used when he was tried and convicted for, among other things, interfering with a federal probe into the jail and then lying about it. Perhaps it’s something in the air out here, but really? Is the Alzheimer’s defense readily available to all old folks? Is this anything like “the dog ate my homework” defense?

Girardi’s brother has offered to surrender Tom Girardi’s license to practice here in California. Last week, the bar finally woke up and said that he is ineligible to practice. He can’t surrender his license, they say, with disciplinary charges pending. (I wonder if the front page Los Angeles Times investigative reporting on Girardi had anything to do with the timing. You think?) The bar opposed the conservatorship, but lost, so the temporary conservatorship remains in place at least until June 30.

Sponsored

The bar has a client security trust fund that can pay out legitimate client claims. I would guess that application will be made by a number of his clients, but I also guess that there will not be enough money in the fund to make clients whole.

The problem is that the bar’s awakening comes too late for the clients and others he stiffed. His firm is no more, and I sympathize with those in his firm who knew nothing about what was going on, and according to reports, Girardi was the only one who did know all that was going on. He controlled everything.

Ironically, just recently, the bar established an ad hoc committee to look at the disparity in the disciplinary actions meted out to white male lawyers and Black male lawyers. Do you think that any disparity exists? Could lawyers facing discipline for trust account violations create a “Girardi” defense? Does the hands-off attitude toward Girardi for years create a precedent for state bar discipline in the future?

To further pile it on, the state bar is presently looking for BOTH an executive director and a chief trial counsel (the former runs the bar, the latter runs the discipline process). What would management consultants say about these vacancies? I don’t think it’s an attractive place to work these days, given how snake-bit everything about the bar seems to be. And by the way, the chief trial counsel must be confirmed by the state Senate.

What aggravates me most of all is the black eye the profession has once again due to the escapades of a lawyer who had been well-respected in the Los Angeles legal community for years. In fact, when word started seeping out above Girardi, one lawyer who I have known for years and highly respect was stunned and didn’t believe it at first. She believes it now. Girardi betrayed the trust of so many people, not just his clients, but his firm and colleagues in the legal community.

Sponsored

Our profession sucks reputation-wise. People think that we are unethical, only out for ourselves, and right now, those words ring true. However, most lawyers here and across the country are ethical and hardworking, trying to do the best for their clients. Will clients no longer trust accountings for disbursement of settlement funds? Will clients now follow the advice of the former President Ronald Reagan to “trust, but verify?”

I am dismayed. Not just with Girardi, although I have plenty of distaste for him, but with the state bar, a few of its staff, a terminated former executive director, and members of the judiciary who didn’t think it was any conflict to attend his lavish gatherings. I can’t wait for the Legislature to weigh in, given the bar’s obligation of public protection enshrined in the Government Code and the public floggings that the Legislature has given the bar over the past few years.

I don’t recall that in all the 44 years that I have been a member — whoops, licensee — of the bar that there has been anything of similar explosiveness. Yes, there have been ongoing issues surrounding the state bar with discipline and its backlog, but nothing like this. Hopefully, if or rather when it happens again, I’ll be taking a dirt nap.

Jill Switzer has been an active member of the State Bar of California for over 40 years. She remembers practicing law in a kinder, gentler time. She’s had a diverse legal career, including stints as a deputy district attorney, a solo practice, and several senior in-house gigs. She now mediates full-time, which gives her the opportunity to see dinosaurs, millennials, and those in-between interact — it’s not always civil. You can reach her by email at oldladylawyer@gmail.com.

Topics

, , ,