July 3, 2009
July 3rd, 2009Greets and Huggers. Posted the evening of July 3, 2009. Interesting discussion this week on the SFIG about setting up a new disciplinary rule that would mandate/require a lawyer, before he/she should die or become disabled, to designated another lawyer, (who ostensibly would be agreeable), to step in and close out/ wind down the dead/disabled lawyers practice. I volunteered early in my career to help close down the practice of a lawyer, Bob Kendrick, who developed a problem with the IRS, was disbarred, and was sentenced to Leavenworth, (where he suffered a fatal heart attack on Christmas Eve, 1985, and passed away, owing the IRS in excess of $100,000.00 in taxes). Looking back now, if you have to check out, that’s not a bad way to go. Having a lawyer plan for the dissolution or winding down of a practice due to death or disability, is no doubt, on it’s face, a good idea … and probably something already put in place by many, if not most, older Solo and Small Firm lawyers. Should it be encouraged? Without a doubt. Should it be mandatory in order to protect the citizens of the State of Missouri?
Suppose it were? Who and how would it be enforced? Last I checked, we have 28,000 +/- licensed lawyers in Missouri. Perhaps a “box” to check on your license renewal form? So the OCDC finds out you didn’t follow through? How? When you croak? So they revoke or suspend your license when they find out you didn’t? Perhaps there are more lawyers in hell than heaven, (I hope not) … but in either case, I don’t think Satan nor God require a license to practice law. Don’t think heaven nor hell have courts, (seems to me, all matters pertaining to you … are “Res Judicata” anyway!) In order to enforce the rule, someone from the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, (OCDC), would have to call each and every licensed lawyer in Missouri, (or perhaps a random sample of lawyers), to verify the election … and chat with the person delegated. How many person hours would that take? How many more staff members would need to be hired? And if the funds are not available, wouldn’t that require the use of funds, or person hours, that would be better spent investigating actual lawyer malfeasance? In my opinion, we SHOULD set up guidelines, a procedure and the requisite forms. Make them available for every Bar member and encourage their use … but implement another section in Rule 4? Assign another task to the OCDC? Share with me … would you favor another dues increase to fund this mandate?
Course, that leads to the obvious solution: mandated legal malpractice insurance, (after all, don’t we require liability insurance if you chose to operate a motor vehicle, in order to protect the public from your negligent operation of that vehicle?) Gosh, if we mandate malpractice insurance, then the insurance company could set that as a precondition for purchasing such insurance. They have the staff to enforce it. But then, what would be their incentive to do so if they could deny a claim because you lied on the application? And perhaps … if you are dead, you might not care. Course, they could also set other preconditions as well: but they would never do that … would they?
I am dumbfounded by the hypocrisy inherent in the argument that “all lawyers should be required to carry malpractice insurance to protect the public”. The 16 legal malpractice carriers that operate in Missouri are required to file annual reports outlining claim information, (R.S.Mo 383.077). The report for 2008 teaches: “By area of law, the largest share of claims closed in 2008 (60 of 231) was initiated by plaintiffs in personal injury and property damage cases. The largest proportion of all claims closed in 2008 and in the past 10 years involved the alleged errors or omissions that occured during the commencement of the legal action or proceeding. Of all claims paid during 2008, 38 percent were settled before filing suit or demanding a hearing on the alleged malpractice.” [Note: for the complete report, click HERE] In Missouri, there were 231 claims closed in 2008. 231 claims out of how many legal transactions? Where did we get the idea that legal malpractice was so rampant, legal malpractice insurance HAS to be mandatory to protect the public? Compared to 231 claims in 2008 and a total of 2,460 since 1999, (of which 1,794 were closed with NO PAYMENT), share with me … how many people harmed themselves using the pro se forms available on the Court Administrators Website put up at the suggestion of our Supreme Court? If, as a profession, we really cared about protecting the public, would we hand some pilgrim the legal scalpel to remove their own legal appendix? As for the The Bar Plan Mutual Insurance Company? (And please know, I mean them NO ill will nor disrespect!!) The Bar Plan wrote 79.78% of the coverage in Missouri in 2008, generated $13,024,263 in premiums and paid out $2,206,781 in claims. That’s a 15.87% loss ratio. It has, according to it’s Website, 56 million dollars in assets. So, since you purchase your malpractice insurance from the Bar Plan, a “mutual” company owned by it’s policy holders … when was the last time you recieved a dividend? There is no malpractice epidemic. Shouldn’t you have the option of deciding for yourself, whether to purchase insurance or self insure, based upon the type of law you practice and the risk you are willing to assume?
And that leaves the underlying two questions: “Does our Supreme Court have the power to mandate that all lawyers practicing law in the State of Missouri carry malpractice insurance.”? I have no doubt, they believe they do. But where does that power come from? “The supreme court may establish rules relating to practice, procedure and pleading for all courts and administrative tribunals, which shall have the force and effect of law.” Missouri Constitution, Article V, Section 5. Share with me how having or not having malpractice insurance relates to “practice, procedure and pleading for all courts and administrative tribunals” ? And from where would they gain the power to grant immunity to any lawyer who volunteers to help close down/wind down the practice of a disabled or deceased lawyer. Wouldn’t our legislature have to do that? And assuming they did, how would that would work? Suppose a Statute Of Limitations runs while the “successor” lawyer is going through the files? Or a default judgment is taken? Who would be liable? The bottom line? I am opposed to our Supreme Court micro-managing the practice of law. I strongly support the ethical standards contained in Rule 4 and sincerely wish our Bar would push for stronger sanctions and enforcement of R.S.Mo 484.020, (the unauthorized practice of law).
In other news … I am finally back up and running!! Replaced the 150gig “standard” drive I replaced my 160gig WD Raptor with, with a 300gig Raptor Tuesday. Used Drive Image 7 to clone it to the Raptor. As an aside, I discovered my old 160gig Western Digital Raptor was under warrantee, (and will be until 2012 – got an RMA and they are replacing it). Formatted the 300gig drive into 2, 150gig drives, (”C” and “D”), so I have the operating system on “C” and will use “D” as the scratch disk for Photoshop CS4. I am absolutely AMAZED at the speed difference between the “standard” drive and the Raptor. The 300gig Raptor, at two times the cost, (BestBuy, $229.99), is WELL worth the extra money!!
Sitting here finishing off these Ramblings. My L’Buddy is in the other chair looking over my shoulder, (Karly and Dinker are playing). We have a new rescue at Ft Timmerman: “Floyd“. He is a little 2.5 pound male Yorkie who has a mangled rear leg. Fr. Pete said a prayer and blessed him this past Sunday. The God I believe in takes care of the least of His creations as well. We hope not, but the leg may have to be amputated. Time will tell. In the mean time, we will love him, make sure he is not in pain and enjoy watching him play with other members of Susan’s pack. Bad leg or not, he can damn sure run as fast as they can!! And as cute as he is, no doubt, we will find him a good home when he is fully healed, (although Susan is getting really, really, really attached: he is her “Little Boy”). The garden is blooming. We will have a bunch of veggies before long!! I can hardly wait to start canning pickles and tomato sauce. For those of you that don’t know, there really is a big difference in taste between store bought tomatoes and fresh tomatoes from the garden! Time to post these Ramblings, go out and snag some weeds and make sure the potted plants are watered and later drift off to sleep with Susan. And when I do, I will say a prayer of thanks for the many blessing in my life, (the greatest being Susan), remind God that little Floyd would appreciate His attention as well … and of course, a prayer for the safe and soon return of our men and women in uniform, (care to join me?) Be and sleep well … there are men and women in uniform walking the walk this evening, on patrol, far from their loved ones, so you can celebrate the freedoms you have, tomorrow. If my post offends, I apologize. That is not my intent. As always …
A Warm Brotherly Hug
KarlT (the dumb old country lawyer from Holden, Missouri and the Editorial Staff, Willie, Karly, my L’il Buddy, Dinker … and Floyd, copy boy in training.)