Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

Legal Malpractice? Lawyer Knowingly Violates Constitutional Rights

Legal Malpractice? Lawyer knowingly violates Constitutional Rights Started by MonkeyInMiddle , Mar 15 2014 10:32 PM Please log in to reply 3 replies to this topic 10 posts Posted 15 March 2014 - 10:32 PM My question is about an individual who is Legal Counsel for a Board of Education. The BOE in question and the administration of the school have done quite a few things that will be addressed in a Criminal Court so I will not go into those details.   The BOE and school administrations actions are the basis for a civil suit on behalf of child, parent and legal custodian of child. Before all of the actions came to light one of the school family resource counselors referred me (legal custodian) and  the mother (2 separate people)  to a local attorney who she knew.  She said she was doing this because she knew there was a big problem and this guy could help us.   Nowhere on his Website does he indicate that he is the Legal Counsel of record for the BOE. We met in his private office which just coincidentaly was about 45miles from the BOE. Nothing in his office gave any indication about BOE involvement. He never said anything about being their legal counsel and actually said he was a "Good Friend" of the Counselor and that she only referred the "Good" parents to him.     It was during the conversation about our possible problem at the school that the RED FLAGS started waving. He kept referring to it being "sad" that there was nothing we could legally do because schools have an imunity from this kind of thing, and personally he thinks that should be changed. When he started referring to the custody order and blatanlty misquoted the law concerning it and then said that there really in no legal basis to hold anybody at the school accountable for failing to uphold their duties as mandatory reporters of child abuse, neglect or possible endangerment because mandatory reporting is just a suggestion I ended the interview.   After some diligent searching of the State Department of Education website (oversees all BOE)  I find out he was the BOE Legal Counsel.   This failure to report went on for two years (Yes I did my own reporting but it is a Different Report than what the school does) This coupled with a bunch of other violations in a lot of areas has caused serious problems for the child.   Since the lawyer never revealed his connection to the BOE or his "Official" connection to the school administration is it correct that he was not acting in his official capacity but was acting under "color of law" when he deliberately lied about the legal issues.   The criminal charges I will let the prosecutor or attorney general deal with. I am doing my research in advance of hiring a civil attorney for the suit. Since I was placed in the legal custodial role for  the protection of this child I have learned to NEVER just consult an attorney. Always do your homework.   I also wonder if the lawyer can be named in the lawsuit since he knowingly and deliberately (got the dated memos to prove it) lied and used his position to deprive a child of protection under the law.   Yes the civil suit will be for a high dollar amount. When dealing with corrupt government officials you have to speak their language. But if we are successful we are only keeping a small amount in trust for the therapy the child needs and will donate the remainder back to the State Departmentof Education in the form of a scholarship in the childs name.   Any thoughts on what the lawyers personal liability is in this case? A lawyer should know better. A lawyer for a BOE and administration at an ELEMENTARY school who is willing to do this puts ALL kids at risk. 16,770 posts Posted 16 March 2014 - 01:01 AM From the sound of it, you had one interview with this lawyer, didn't like and didn't trust what he had to say, and evidently did not hire him to do anything. After the interview, you found out he was a lawyer for the BoE. If that is correct, I see no basis at all for a successful lawsuit against the lawyer. He apparently didn't ever represent the child, so there is no malpractice claim here. So far as I can tell, you didn't follow any advice the lawyer may have provided in that interview and thus the child suffered no harm from it. Thus, I can't see any viable lawsuit against the lawyer just from the facts you provided in your post. The mere fact that he provided wrong information in that interview, without more, isn't a good basis for a legal claim. Note that lawsuits are about compensation for injuries suffered. Suing for a huge amount when there is no significant  injury is the sort of thing that the raises the ire of the public; it feeds the perception of civil lawsuits and the lawyers that litigate them as being out of control. It is also the sort of thing that will annoy at least some judges was a waste of their time.    If I have misunderstood your facts, please clarify exactly what it is that the lawyer did (other than advice and representation of the BoE itself) that you believe caused harm Canyon Lake Dog Bite Attorney for which you could sue on the child?s behalf. 16,770 posts Posted 17 March 2014 - 02:15 AM Your facts only related to the one meeting with the attorney. A meeting that resulted ultimately in a decision not to hire him and you evidently did not act on what he told you. As a result, there appears no harm from what he told you at that meeting and thus nothing for which to sue because of it. Nothing in what you wrote suggests that he was ?acting under color of law? at that interview. If you are trying to make him liable for some other harm that was done to the child not connected with the meeting with the lawyer, then I faile to see how that meeting is relevant.    You say there is much more, but of course I cannot comment on facts I do not have. Just from what you have said, I don't see any basis for going after the attorney. You mention the child being abducted. But unless you are claiming that the attorney abducted the child, I don't see the connection between the meeting with the attorney and the abduction. Bear in mind, I and everyone else here no absolutely knowing about this other than what you tell us. Without the right information, no one can provide you with a good answer.
For the original version including any supplementary images or video, visit http://boards.answers.findlaw.com/index.php/topic/229754-legal-malpractice-lawyer-knowingly-violates-constitutional-rights/

Don't be the product, buy the product!