So, from time to time I have really thought about writing something about how much a particular column series in a major legal ethics publication bothers me. If you read the title of this post, and you have access to a subscription to Legal Ethics Law360, then you probably already know which one I am talking about.
It’s an ongoing series of short columns they have included on a recurring basis under the heading “Expert Analysis,” that are always titled [blank] Makes Me A Better Lawyer. What fills in that [blank] has included things like “Flying,” “Being an Artist,” “Beekeeping,” “Home Canning,” and “Round Canopy Parachuting,” “Playing Golf,” and “Boxing.”
The gimmick of course is the obvious point that a well-rounded life can make people better at their jobs. Beyond that point, however, the persistence of offering short columns that do not much more than tell the reader about a particular lawyer’s hobby doesn’t really do much for anybody (or at least not for me). Pretty much one article saying that having a hobby can make you a better lawyer would have done the trick. But content is a hungry beast. Believe me, I get it.
Up until today, every time I have considered actually expressing my frustration at those columns, I have stopped and charted a different course because my inner-voice and willingness to second-guess my impulses (which makes me a better lawyer! [ha!]) has convinced me that the end product would just sound unnecessarily salty and curmudgeonly.
But not today! That’s because I only managed in the last day or two to catch up with the story of this former public defender in Pennsylvania you has been suspended for one year and one day because of having been under the influence of cocaine during a court hearing back in November 2022. The disciplinary case against the lawyer came about because a police officer present in the courtroom observed the lawyer being “very hyperactive, fidgety,” and that the lawyer “put his sunglasses on and kept his sunglasses on during the duration while” he was in court. The law enforcement officer followed the lawyer out into the parking lot to confront him. While no criminal charges against the lawyer resulted, eventually a disciplinary proceeding was pursued.
The lawyer initially was defending himself in his disciplinary case (an approach I’ve written about in the past) and actually argued that the cocaine was something of a performance-enhancing drug. Of course, in addition to all of the other reasons you likely are thinking of about the problem with that defense, the preliminary hearing in question was one where all the lawyer did was waive it for his client. Later in the proceedings, after he had hired an attorney to represent him, he acknowledged having addiction problems and expressed a willingness to seek treatment for substance abuse. The Court’s November 6 order imposing the suspension can be found here.
His rejected Law360 submission “Cocaine Makes Me a Better Lawyer,” however cannot be found online.
Admittedly, problems involving drug abuse are inherently not funny. Nor should they really be made light of. And yet, we are now faced with the possibility of having someone be in charge of the Department of Health and Human Services who has previously openly discussed how he used heroin as a study aid, but who is going to try to stop people from having access to legitimate prescription drugs for ADHD.
So, I mean, who knows anything anymore.