Blog & More News

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of free speech today in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Hopefully this serves as a warning to the government in its meddling in political, editorial, religious and even commercial speech content.

READ THE DECISION HERE

Today I received an IM from an old friend of mine whom I’ve had as a FB “friend” for a year or so (we’ve known each other much longer in the real world). She started out on the IM by asking how things were in Jacksonville and how my family was, then led into a saga about how she is stuck in London, unable to buy a plane ticket because she was robbed the previous night. After a few pity responses from me (like, “wow, that must be awful”), she (or perhaps, he) asked if I could lend her some money to buy a ticket. She needed $300 wired to a WESTERN UNION near the airport. I grew suspicious and immediately e-mailed her brother for the real friend’s cel phone number. When I called the real her (while chatting with her alter-ego imposter online) the real she confirmed that she was not in London, but in Atlanta.

The come-on is endearing because they “know” you and once you’re a bit warmed up, the appeal for cash comes along. This scam is the apparent result of someone having lifted her log-in name and password and taking control of her account. She’s now locked out of it and quite embarrassed (I was not the first to call my actual friend to verify that she was not stranded in London).

Beware of this scam.

Here’s a nice and concise article from the NYT for small business people considering selling their business.

There is nothing more sacred than your client’s property. Simply: it is not yours. It is intrusted to you to hold for their benefit.

The recent article in the Florida Bar News (click here to read) regarding the Bar needing to find ways to stop rogue attorneys from stealing client funds from trust accounts, is both embarrassing and painful to read. Just how bad can it be for an attorney, to stoop so low as to take client funds or other client property? It is very troubling to think the problem is as bad as it apparently is. I’ve been taught by the Bar and everyone in the profession I’ve ever worked with, to follow the rules to the letter at treat client property as SACRED.

It seems to me that, while on the one had we want to allow for due process before discipline, on the other hand, due process may diminish the deterrent effect of discipline. It’s a shame if we all end up having to suffer the burdens associated with higher scrutiny and of the prospect of surprise audits because there are some who have no ethics with respect to client property. It is angering. But if it has to be done, so be it.

Perhaps greater scrutiny of Bar applicants, and a quicker and more public disciplinary process, would aid in prevention and deterrence. Thoughts?