Posted by
NOTLEGALROADKILLYET on Monday, October 02, 2006 1:47:19 AM
The primary purpose of this blog is to impact the legal ethics system in a way that forces it to protect the public. That system is currently designed to protect unethical judges and lawyers FROM the public, not the other way around.
I am not a lawyer. Much of what I have learned and will be sharing I acquired in the process of unsuccessfully trying to stop obvious and apparent unethical conduct by an attorney in my seven year old lawsuit and get that suit moving toward closure. I am treating this blog like a book, so that to get the full effect, readers would do well to start at the beginning. There are two series of posts that readers might like to focus on. They are "
Designed to Fail," whose thesis is that the Colorado State Supreme Court never intended that the legal ethics system work, and "
A Low Risk Attorney Scam" which describes a nifty way for an attorney and his client to stall a lawsuit almost indefinitely at next to no risk. Since these are dry subjects for many, I try to write one new section to one or both series every week. Those sections each require several hours of research, so there is no set schedule.
My intermediate goal is to see Amendment 40, judicial term limits pass in Colorado, if only to get rid of the justices who designed the legal ethics system to fail. My ultimate goal is to design a system that removes the lawyers and courts from the legal ethics business altogether and places it in the hands of a largely nonlawyer commission. This would get rid of the "the only rule is that there are no rules" attitude that many lawyers, judges, justices and even US Supreme Court Justices have. The system I will suggest works very well in Colorado and elsewhere for real estate brokers and there is no apparent reason it would not work for attorneys and judges.
I freely admit that I will be passing along every embarrassing legal item I find, and there are many to be found. We currently have an intermittent five justice majority on the US Supreme Court that doesn't seem to believe in the plain words of the Constitution or Stare Decisis, and a legally ignorant press corps that only believes that Stare Decisis applies only to Roe. Our State Supreme Court's members can only be described as "arrogant." In short, I have lots of material and more comes available daily.
In many ways, I am conducting a seminar on the law from the perspective of a litigant, and I believe that much of what I have learned is likely to apply to any lawsuit in any state. I'd suggest persons who have an interest in the law begin at the beginning of the blog. I will be rewriting some posts to better fit the format I have adopted, but I think there is something to learn there anyway.
I happen to like politics, and politics often involve the law, so it is natural that there are many political posts. Others are doing the national stuff quite well, so I hit the state and local stuff a bit harder. After the election, I do intend to make some comments about Republican attempts to duplicate Democratic mistakes that I expect that some will not like but that hopefully most will respect.
-------
I have realized that the term "Cliff's Notes" is likely trademarked. To save some attorney the trouble of sending me a cease and desist letter, I have changed the name. I apologize for the inadvertant inconvenience.