Legal News

Do Rothstein-like Scandals Change the Perception of Lawyers?

By Ashby Jones

They say one bad apple spoils the bunch. But when it comes to one lawyer in a legal community, to what degree is that really true?

We ask the question in light of a post we saw today over at Overlawyered, which links to a story from the Daily Business Review on our favorite alleged South Florida Ponzi-scheming lawyer, Scott Rothstein.

According to the story, some members of the south Florida bar are worrying about “how the Fort Lauderdale powerbroker’s spectacular downfall might affect the public trust in the profession, which is implicitly relied upon as an honest broker in business and policy matters in both the public and private sector.”

Some sound concerned. Take IRS agent Daniel Auer: “Here we have an attorney, an officer of the court, whose core values should be honesty and integrity, and instead he is unlawfully enriching himself at the expense of his clients.”

Others, however, seem to shrug off the notion that the profession — at least in south Florida — will be tarnished. “I don’t think he made us all look bad. I think he made lawyers wearing $5,000 suits and driving $500,000 cars look bad,” said David Markus, a Miami criminal defense attorney.

Ed Davis, a founding shareholder at Miami’s Astigarraga Davis, toed a different line. He said Rothstein’s alleged actions didn’t help the breach of trust issues the public always has with attorneys, “but you can’t judge the entire profession by the acts of a few.”

LBers, what do you think? One the one hand, lawyers are asked and required to hold themselves to a high ethical standard. We think it’s arguable that each Mark Dreier-esque episode serves to corrode the profession, just a bit, in the eyes of the public. And that’s not good for lawyers or, frankly, the justice system generally.

At the same time, we’re sympathetic to the view that Ponzi-scheming lawyers are the exceptionally rare exception to the rule that lawyers are, for the most part, ethical people and take their ethical obligations extremely seriously. What think you?

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on December 10, 2009 (boomark / email).