Maryland law – general

Baltimore City Terminates Contract with Neo-Nazi Attorney Consultant

Baltimore Sun, August 18, 2016:

The Rawlings-Blake administration said it had fired Glen Keith Allen, 65, a contract employee who had worked on complex litigation for the city since February. The city began investigating Allen’s background after the Southern Poverty Law Center reported that he had a history of supporting the neo-Nazi National Alliance.

The real story – underreported – behind this is that Glen Keith Allen and his City-side boss George Nilson had both worked at mega-firm DLA Piper during different periods. Allen still (as of August 20) has a Client Protection Fund mailing address at DLA Piper’s Mount Washington office with the Maryland courts for his law license.  How a firm like DLA Piper – ironically, headquartered in its Baltimore office just over the City line at the edge of a predominantly Jewish and African-American neighborhood – had a neo-Nazi funder on its payroll is a horrifying mystery.

This well-publicized embarrassment to the city of Baltimore also cost George Nilson his job as city solicitor.

Maryland Lawyers’ Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(e) designates as misconduct the knowing manifestation:

by words or conduct when acting in a professional capacity bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status when such action is prejudicial to the administration of justice, provided, however, that legitimate advocacy is not a violation of this section.

There is a good argument that funding a group like the neo-Nazi National Alliance with one’s personal funds doesn’t constitute action in a “professional capacity.” A Southern Poverty Law Center report indicates that Glen Allen not only acted at various times as an attorney for the National Alliance but on at least one occasion donated $500.00 of his own money to the organization.

The representation of neo-Nazis or an alliance of neo-Nazis does not constitute endorsement of neo-Nazi views; MLRPC 1.2(b): An attorney’s representation of a client, including representation by appointment, does not constitute an endorsement of the client’s political, economic, social or moral views or activities. However, do donating one’s own funds to neo-Nazis and then acting as their attorney in another context constitute, together, a manifestation of an 8..4(e) violation?

The following comment is offered in my personal, not professional, capacity.  I do not see how one can reconcile the Maryland Attorney’s Oath (Md. Code Ann., BO § 10-212) with personal support for the views of Nazism, white supremacy or the German Third Reich:

I do solemnly (swear) (affirm) that I will at all times demean myself fairly and honorably as an attorney and practitioner at law; that I will bear true allegiance to the State of Maryland, and support the laws and Constitution thereof, and that I will bear true allegiance to the United States, and that I will support, protect and defend the Constitution, laws and government thereof as the supreme law of the land; any law, or ordinance of this or any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Posted by Bruce Godfrey in Legal Ethics, Maryland law - general, 0 comments

Alan Hilliard Legum, R.I.P.

A very decent man died this week. Annapolis attorney Alan Hilliard Legum died this week according to a recent announcement by his law partner Shane Nikolao and reports in the Capital Gazette.

Alan was surprisingly gentle in his style for a litigation attorney, very understated in his personal demeanor but most effective in his practice – a model for young attorneys.  Among his professional focuses were large tort liability claims against large utility companies and government agencies.  His office on West Street was where I had my first post-law school clerk job..  His son Judd Legum is a nationally recognized public figure in his work in the founding of Think Progress, a liberal advocacy organization.

Alan cared a lot about fundamental justice and civil rights issues and was closely allied in civic life with controversial Annapolis alderman and civil rights activist Carl Snowden (later active in state government as well.)  The Legum family has long lived in the Annapolis area and has included several attorneys and judges.

Speaking personally, I am most grateful for something that Alan did – humanely but resolutely – to aid me in my professional development – namely, his firing me.  6 weeks after I got barred, Alan realized that his practice needed better than 6 weeks of lawyer experience from his clerk.  My drafting skills were not what they needed to be for his active practice, and he was too busy with the actual business of helping clients to train a green lawyer.  I felt disappointed in myself when this happened, but there’s no doubt he made the right decision for his clients’ needs, and he was such a decent human being about it. How he handled that situation says more about this good man than most of the accolades that you may read about him in the newspapers.

My condolences to Alan’s family and friends.  A very decent man and attorney has passed away. The Capital reports that there will be a memorial service this Sunday at 10 AM at Annapolis Roads, south of Eastport at a park facing the Severn River.

Posted by Bruce Godfrey in Godfrey-personal, Maryland law - general, 2 comments

DLLR: Prison inmates received unemployment

Baltimore Sun, March 7, 2015:

The audit of the Division of Unemployment Insurance, which was released Friday, found that the agency did not periodically review whether people getting unemployment benefits were incarcerated, had the same address as others also getting benefits, or were DLLR employees. In a sampling, auditors found that four incarcerated people were paid about $17,700 in benefits between June 2012 and December 2013.

I am surprised that it was not much more, especially after counting people who are only locked up for very short periods while they are getting benefits. $17,700 is about 40 weeks of max benefits or little less than 2 beneficiaries maxing out on 26 weeks of benefits over 18 months out of a total Maryland population of perhaps 4 million adults. The minimum UI unit is a week of benefits; not everyone gets the maximum payment in a UI week, but this is not massive fraud or overpayment.

Posted by Bruce Godfrey in Maryland law - general, Unemployment, 0 comments

Friolo v. Frankel: 14 years of Maryland litigation and still going strong

Friolo sued Frankel under the Maryland wage payment and collection statute, and the rest has been 14 years of trial and appellate history, including the appointment of a special master and three trips to Maryland’s highest court.  A lot of the fighting has dealt with attorneys’ fees, specifically the reasonableness of requested fee-shifting under Md. Code Ann., Labor and Employment article, §3-507.2.

From the very recent opinion of Judge Wilner, specially assigned to this case after his retirement, I give you the first paragraph and last sentence thereof.

“This case is making its third appearance in this Court, having visited the Court of Special Appeals twice and having occupied the attention of the Circuit Court for Montgomery County on three occasions, one of which involved two separate proceedings. Like Kaufman and Hart’s man who came to dinner, it is wearing out its welcome….

“We would admonish Friolo and Goldsmith [ed. Plaintiff’s counsel] to be mindful of the risks of excessively gilding the lily and suggest to both parties that it is not too late to negotiate a settlement.”

For those poorly formed in the American theatrical tradition such as myself, this is a link to Wikipedia’s entry on The Man Who Came to Dinner.  Since I have no culture, I probably would have gone with Groundhog Day.

Posted by Bruce Godfrey in Employment Law, Maryland law - general, Practice of Law, 0 comments