Miers Plays Santa Claus to Lefty Lawyers

chimpstein.com, an investigative website ^ | 10/23/2005 | Louis E. Chimpstein

[caryatid]

* ping *

[caryatid]

* ping *

[Cicero]

Yessiree, this is the smoking gun, all right.

And it doesn't just come out of left field, either. It exactly fits the pattern revealed by many of her writings.

[GarySpFc]

What a load of carp. This is simply a trust fund for client awards to keep the attorneys honest. We have the same thing in the insurance business. All monies have to go in the account so there is a record, and all monies going out has to be strictly accounted for. The interest generated on this money is used to benefit various groups by the Texas Bar. There is nothing in the record to show Miers had one thing to do with how this money was used. Indeed, as head of the bar it is highly unlikely she allowed such a conflict of interest.

[SAJ]

Why does not the interest accrued go to the owner of the funds in question? If monies are being held in abeyance pending a resolution of a legal issue, or (effectively) in trust for the same or related reasons, does that somehow -- magically, no doubt -- transfer the ownership of such funds to another party?

If not, then there is no possible excuse for paying interest earned on such funds to the owner of those funds.

Typical lawyers and lawyerisms.

Yet one more reason why Miers is unacceptable. Having anything at all to do with an ongoing theft that is conveniently labelled ''legal'' should rate instant disqualification for any sort of judgeship.

[SAJ]

Please read, ''...for NOT paying interest...''.

Typo, my apologies.

[caryatid]

What a load of carp.

Carp ... ?

[Cicero]

Pardon me, but she certainly knew that this law would FORCE lawyers to pay interest that should have been paid to their clients into a central fund, on threat of disbarment and criminal penalties.

And with all her years of experience among the leftists in the ABA and her keen interest in "public interest" law, she certainly knew what kind of projects the money would be spent on. It was entirely predictable.

She has always been an advocate of "public interest" law, which is basically controlled by leftists.

[GarySpFc]

Yet one more reason why Miers is unacceptable. Having anything at all to do with an ongoing theft that is conveniently labelled ''legal'' should rate instant disqualification for any sort of judgeship.

Your anti-Miers slander is noted. It is not theft, since the monies are deposited, and checks to the clients written shortly thereafter. The interest on any one claim if likely very low, but with tens or hundreds of thousands of deposits the interest adds up. Keeping track of small amounts of interst is really not practical.

[GarySpFc]

I misspelled the word for polite company. :)

[GarySpFc]

Pardon me, but she certainly knew that this law would FORCE lawyers to pay interest that should have been paid to their clients into a central fund, on threat of disbarment and criminal penalties.

Excuse me. May I suggest you reread the article. IOLTA was hatched in Florida in 1981. Where was Miers? Furthermore, it is not the clients money until paid out minus legal fees and expenses. Additionally, Miers did not control where the monies went.

[caryatid]

* ping *

[SAJ]

'Practicality' is not my problem, Mr. Situational Ethics, Mr. Relative Morality.

Property is property, ownership is an indivisible term. The interest accrued on assorted funds while lawyers jack the public around in this bizarre 'system' of 'law' absolutely apodeictically belongs to the owner of these temporarily extorted funds.

When 'law' recognises this simple fact again, as it did for -- lo! -- the first 150 or so years of our Republic, then I will remove the apostrophes. Not before.

BTW, counselor, you misused a term, to wit, slander. Slander, at 'law', requires malice as an element. I have no malice toward Miers; may she prosper hugely, may she live her life, go bankrupt tomorrow, win the lottery, contract a mortal disease, whatever...it's all one with me. Good for her, and who cares? Given her behaviour as regards citizens' property in the process described in the article, though, is an absolute disqualifier from any bench, from J.P. up to SCOTUS.

There is no malice whatever, as defined at 'law', in the sentiment above.

Oh, yes, one other abuse on your part. 'Slander' is a civil tort involving spoken language; 'libel' is the equivalent tort involving the written word. Just FYI.

[PackerBoy]

He has a point. Although client's money is most frequently "parked" for a short time, I have an attorney friend whose client lost $100,000+ while a complicated settlement issue regarding a seven figure settlement was worked out and the funds, held in the IOLTA, could not be invested or distributed. This is a taking of client money without due process -- no question about it.

[SAJ]

Rubbish. One did not have to be present at the authorship of the Communist Manifesto in order to be a present-day Communist. One did not have to be present in a Munich beer hall in 1921 (not 1923, look it up) at the founding of the National Socialist Workers' Party in order to be a Nazi.

Nor did Miers have to be present at the founding of IOLTA in order to espouse their peculiar incestuous method of theft.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

Your anti-Miers slander is noted.

The guy actually made some well reasoned points. Slader is it now for saying she's unacceptable, I'm surprised you didn't call it "treason" as you are one of the biggest Miers cheerleaders on FR.

The interest on any one claim if likely very low, but with tens or hundreds of thousands of deposits the interest adds up. Keeping track of small amounts of interst is really not practical.

I can't believe you are going this route...
"See Joanna, its like Superman 3, you just take those fractions of interest that they otherwise drop, and you put them in a bank account."
"Isn't that like stealing?"
"No, see its like pennies at the gas station-"
"For the crippled kids?"
"No no, you know if you need a penny you take it, its just in this case we're going to be going to that tray a couple of thousand times a day..."
"So you are taking money out"
"Yeah"
"That's not your's"
"Right"
"How is that not stealing?"
"Uh, I guess I'm not explaining this very well..."

[GarySpFc]

Mr. Nonsense, the system was set up in Florida in 1981, which was prior to Miers taking charge of the Texas Bar. I agree it should be the clients money, but that is not the way it has been defined by the bar.

Secondly, I do detect malice in many of the anti-Miers posts...maybe not at law, but malice just the same.

A desire to harm others or to see others suffer; extreme ill will or spite.

[GarySpFc]

No, you are not.

[GarySpFc]

Nor did Miers have to be present at the founding of IOLTA in order to espouse their peculiar incestuous method of theft.

Do I detect more than a little desperation in your posts?