Giuliani’s law firm lobbying in Texas for Chavez

[JollyRoger]

The bottom line is the lawfirm is representing Citgo, a corporate entity, not Hugo Chavez. Hugo Chavez is the president of Venezuela, not the owner of Citgo. In fact, Venezuelas interest in the corp is several layers above Citgo itself.

To put the picture in a correct analogy, it would be like saying I should have Jollyroger disbarred since he has said offcolor remarks about me here in the forum and my wife owns some stock in a company Jollyroger represents.

Pretty ridiculous....well, very ridiculous actually.

Chaves is top top officer of a chain of corporations. If I'm representing an Exxon holding company that is several layers down the corporate holding chain, I can't publically bash the Exxon CEO because he is seen as a representive of my corporate client.

 

[El_Machinae]

Just pull out the rules, JR. They should be available for the public, no?
(and I'm still waiting for MobBoss to pull out rules that states that adultery will get someone disbarred ... I don't believe that one)

 

[MobBoss]

Screwing your clients (figuartively as Giuliani did here) will get you disbarred much more quickly than screwing other women. But you know that.

Again, Hugo Chavez is not their client.

 

[MobBoss]

Just pull out the rules, JR. They should be available for the public, no?
(and I'm still waiting for MobBoss to pull out rules that states that adultery will get someone disbarred ... I don't believe that one)

A sexual realationship with a client or a clients spouse could possibly get you disbarred.

http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_1_8_comm.html

Just commiting adultery would depend on the state. If the state has a state law making adultery illegal (some do) then they could face possible action by their state bar.

http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_8_4_comm.html

To whit:

[2] Many kinds of illegal conduct reflect adversely on fitness to practice law, such as offenses involving fraud and the offense of willful failure to file an income tax return. However, some kinds of offenses carry no such implication. Traditionally, the distinction was drawn in terms of offenses involving "moral turpitude." That concept can be construed to include offenses concerning some matters of personal morality, such as adultery and comparable offenses, that have no specific connection to fitness for the practice of law.

Good enough?

 

[El_Machinae]

A sexual realationship with a client or a clients spouse could possibly get you disbarred.

No argument there. I didn't think that's what you were saying.

There are states where adultery is illegal?

I give up, you were right. I didn't predict that adultery would be a crime in some places!

The phrasing on that entire paragraph is fuzzy though. I first read it as "crimes like adultery won't get you disbarred, but crimes involving violence will". I still lean to that interpretation. Though I can twist my brain to the way you're indicating that it should be read.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Again, Hugo Chavez is not their client.

You mean he's not anymore.

But Hugo=Citgo sure seemed to be true back when everyone was boycotting Citgo and people put big cardboard signs on their gas stations saying things like "WE DON'T SHIP OIL FROM VENEZUELA."

 

[JollyRoger]

A sexual realationship with a client or a clients spouse could possibly get you disbarred.

http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_1_8_comm.html

Just commiting adultery would depend on the state. If the state has a state law making adultery illegal (some do) then they could face possible action by their state bar.

http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mrpc/rule_8_4_comm.html

To whit:



Good enough?

Did you read what you posted - it specifically gave your bolded adultry as an offense that doen't particvulary apply to the fitness to practice law. Sleeping with your client, adultry or not, can get you in trouble as a lawyer. Sleeping with some random woman, even a married woman, will not get you in trouble.

Disloyalty to a client will. Chavez is a representaive of the coprorate parent of Citgo. Giuliani's firm represents Citgo (even if they have withdrawn representation, the general duty of loyalty to a former client would remain). If you haven't worked in the private sector for a couple of decades, yiou might not understand how the private sector works, but for a lawyer, a corporate representative of a parent company of you client = client as far as your duty of loayalty goes. Since the parent is a state-owned entity, Giuliani should not be bad mouthing him through their representatives.

The firm was/is doing legal work in regards to lobbying for Citgo. Badmouthing Chavez undercuts that effort.

 

[El_Machinae]

Did you read what you posted - it specifically gave your bolded adultry as an offense that doen't particvulary apply to the fitness to practice law.

That doesn't become clear until you read the rest of the paragraph, that's not in the text that MobBoss quoted