Posted on 01/15/2016 3:26:36 PM PST by Lockbox
Pennsylvania's Unified Judicial System ORDERED that Newton B. Schwartz, Sr., is suspended on consent from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of three years on 2/25/15.
http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/DisciplinaryBoard/out/204DB2014-Schwartz.pdf
Supreme Court of Louisiana dated 2/14/14
Upon review of the findings and recommendation of the hearing committee, the findings, recommendation, and ruling of the disciplinary board, and considering the record, briefs, and oral argument, the court hereby renders the following orders of discipline: It is ordered that Seth Cortigene, Louisiana Bar Roll number 19528, be and he hereby is disbarred. Mr. Cortigene’s name shall be stricken from the roll of attorneys and his license to practice law in the State of Louisiana shall be revoked. It is further ordered that Newton B. Schwartz, Sr. shall be enjoined for a period of three years from seeking admission to the Louisiana bar or seeking admission to practice in Louisiana on a temporary or limited basis, including, but not limited to, seeking pro hac vice admission before a Louisiana court pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XVII, § 13 or seeking limited admission as an in-house counsel pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XVII, § 14.
http://www.lasc.org/opinions/2014/13B2022cw13B2172.opn.pdf
Seth Cortigene and Newton B. Schwartz, Sr. The court found that Scwartz, a lawyer not admitted in Louisiana, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by appearing at a Louisiana deposition. The court found that Cortigene facilitated Schwartz’s unauthorized practice, and failed to report it to the ODC. The court disbarred Cortigne. The court enjoined Schwartz for a period of three years from seeking admission to practice law in Louisiana on either a permanent or temporary basis. In so doing, it answered in the affirmative what it considered to be a res nova issue, that is, whether the court has the authority to impose discipline on a lawyer not admitted to the bar of Louisiana.
http://lalegalethics.org/february-2014-discipline/
The Commission for Lawyer Discipline v. Newton B. Schwartz, Sr. to be ï¬led in the 157th District Court of Harris County, Texas 1/30/2009.
http://www.txcourts.gov/All_Archived_Documents/SupremeCourt/AdministrativeOrders/miscdocket/09/09901300.pdf
Dude would not have had standing anyway. As I understand the process.
Why doesn’t Don Trump sue him?
Will someone kindly explain how this attorney who has a history of disciplinary license suspension able to obtain 'legal standing' in this case?
It's those Texas values again.
That’s what I’ve been saying since Trump started his attacks. As a candidate, he is one of the few people with standing.
No ruling on whether has has standing. He has filed and that’s as far as its gotten.
In NYC, they'd have given him a judicial appointment instead.
Whew...it a good thing he didn’t file suit in Louisianna
Speaking of values, isn’t Cruz’s wife a Director at the Goldman Sachs, arguably one of the most distrusted unscrupulous companies on the planet?
Hmmm..
Even if he had standing SCOTUS would never touch this with a ten foot pole.
Wow. News! Thanks. So, what’s your excuse?
She has the title of Managing Director of the office she works in. I'm not sure why someone would misrepresent that as making her a member of the Board of Directors.
Goldman Sachs, American values at it’s best!
You’re welcome.
Goldman Sachs is the oddest boogie man of all to keep drumming up. Don’t like them? Don’t let them take care of your investment portfolio.
No worries about that.
They’re arguable one of the most unscrupulous companies in the country. It’s no secret.
People downplay her position, but that doesn't hold water :
Managing director is the firm's second-highest rank, according to Bloomberg. She works as the regional head of Goldman's Houston office in the private wealth-management division, which serves accounts with larger than $40 million with the firm. She was promoted to that position in 2013 after working as a vice president for seven years.
Kinda resolves that "why call here a VP" thing, too.
Yes Goldman Sachs is well known to be more than unscrupulous (I made $145,000 betting against one of their “buy” recommendations), but that does not mean that Cruz’s wife is unscrupulous...Goldman Sachs is also known for hiring super-sharp people...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.