When is the Wyoming Supreme Court going to wake up? For that matter, when are lawyers going to decide enough is enough? It is apparent and obvious that #MarkGifford goes after lawyers he has a grudge against and that he makes allegations that have no merit. Lawyers like Marcy Argeris, Dion Cusis, and Laurence Stinson are all victim to this over-aggressive approach. Bar counsel should not be using a shotgun style of pleading in discipline cases. Bar counsel should plead only allegations with clear and convincing merit. But #MarkGifford throws every allegation possible into the complaint full well knowing the Board of Professional Responsibility will do just what juries do, split the baby. To make all of this worse, once discipline is issued (or rubber stamped) by the Wyoming Supreme Court then the bar (a/k/a #MarkGifford) writes a one-sided notice of suspension to be published for bar members. That notice is presumably picked up by media. The notice yesterday (in the Stinson case) conveniently failed to mention the court approved the finding by the BPR that the complainants were not credible but #MarkGifford relied on these same people; that #MarkGifford made many allegations that were unsupported by the evidence but he was not sanctioned for doing so; and that the Board found #MarkGifford's approach untrustworthy, in part, because he willfully attempted to introduce irrelevant evidence. No surprise the notice failed to mention this when #MarkGifford wrote it. The stated purpose of lawyer discipline is to correct behavior and not to humiliate and punish. The #WyomingStateBar and the #WyomingSupremeCourt are completely missing the mark. Let this Stinson case serve as a wake up call for better supervision of the bar offices.
This seems to me like it was written by Mr. Stinson. If that's the case, this blog seems less like a quest for justice and more like a platform for a child to stomp his feet and whine.
ReplyDelete