When I began practicing law in 1946, justice was much simpler. I joined a small Tucson practice at a salary of $250 a month, excellent compensation for a beginning lawyer. There was no paralegal staff or expensive artwork on the walls.In those days, the judicial system was straightforward and efficient. Decisions were handed down by judges who applied the law as outlined by the Constitution and state legislatures. Cases went to trial in a month or two, not years. In the courtroom, the focus was on uncovering and determining truth and fact.
I charged clients by what I was able to accomplish for them. The clock did not start ticking the minute they walked through the door.
Looking back
The legal profession has evolved dramatically during my 87 years. I am a second-generation lawyer from an Irish immigrant family that settled in Yuma. My father, who passed the Bar with a fifth-grade education, ended up arguing a case before the U.S. Supreme Court during his career.The law changed dramatically during my years in the profession. For example, when I accepted my first appointment as a Pima County judge in 1957, I saw that lawyers expected me to act more as a referee than a judge. The county court I presided over resembled a gladiator arena, with dueling lawyers jockeying for points and one-upping each other with calculated and ingenuous briefs.
That was just the beginning.
By the time I ended my 50-year career as a trial attorney, judge and president of southern Arizona's largest law firm, I no longer had confidence in the legal fraternity I had participated in and, yes, profited from.
I was the ultimate insider, but as I looked back, I felt I had to write a book about serious issues in the legal profession and the implications for clients and society as a whole. The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion was 10 years in the making and has become my call to action for legal reform.
Full Article and Source:
The Fraternity: Lawyers and Judges in Collusion
7 comments:
A great article by an honest man, who served his community and beyond with Honor most of his adult life. As I have stated before, the lawyers and judges who applied the law, as the United States Constitution demands, are a generation past. We no longer can trust a corrupt judiciary. I will find his book for my libray..Thank you. eb
Bring it on and thank you for living long enough to have the time to publicly release the truth what you experienced, witnessed and profited from I guess that's the good news bad news. Those of us battling the courts appreciate your expose in these matters. When a lawyer speaks out ~ people listen when a party to the action speaks out, well they're just disgruntled losing litigants.
Most take this information to their graves where it's buried.
See what Illinois ARDC does to lawyers who speak out during their lawyering years google Ken Ditkowsky and Mary Sykes Blog:
Attorney Ken Ditkowsky Answers ARDC Complaint
nasga-stopguardianabuse.blogspot.com/.../attorney-ken-ditkowsky-answ...
Mar 28, 2012 - Admit that certain facts are true and dismiss the case, or on the hand deny that ... Now comes Kenneth Ditkowsky and renews his Motion to dismiss this .... Could it be the IL ARDC used this no basis complaint as a spiked club ...
We know that the lawyers eat their own, not just because they're hungry, but in order to make sure the feast will keep coming.
I haven't read it yet, but I don't need to; I lived it!
As a former paralegal and court reporter, I LOVED the law.
It wasn't until I became a litigant that I learned the truth.
Fired two lawyers - one screwed up and the other tried to screw me - he sold me out to my adversary.
So thinking I knew enough about the law, I decided to test the system myself, and I did, all the way to the top, where I got the final "screw you!" - an unsigned letter from the Supremes' clerk: "Petition for certiorari denied."
I called up to complain: "I got an unsigned letter. I want a court order signed by a judge."
"Why?"
"So I can frame it."
I am now in the process of dumping a lifetime of paper, both litigation and research.
And I will never - willingly - step inside a courtroom again - at least on my own behalf.
our founding fathers are vomiting in their graves which brings my attention to our pledge 'and justice for all' well that is a crock of ***** isn't it? justice for a price for some and in the criminal arena it's up to investigators if they will agree to investigate with a conclusion take action or take no action then the prosecutor puts his or her opinion in whether to invest the manpower hey we the taxpayers are paying their wages or let the case collect dust til the statute of limitations go poof sadly for me I can say I've been through the civil litigation process and criminal process as plaintiff there are some really good judges out there but its a gamble who will preside over your case
Thank you JUSTICE JOHN F. MOLLOY. Your words speak volumes, giving our effort much needed credibility and support that is needed to reform the system turned into a racket.
Word is those who can, do know the out of control guardianship / conservatorship national disgrace.
Word is those who know do not approve of what they do know.
Word is those who can do something in reality don't have a clue what to do about it.
The problem has been identified with supporting evidence yet nothing no actions are taken to reform to protect the family unit from total destruction all under the guise of protection.
Insight By JUSTICE JOHN F. MOLLOY
Lawyer domination
When a lawyer puts on a robe and takes the bench, he or she is called a judge. But in reality, when judges look down from the bench they are lawyers looking upon fellow members of their fraternity. In any other area of the free-enterprise system, this would be seen as a conflict of interest.
When a lawyer takes an oath as a judge, it merely enhances the ruling class of lawyers and judges. First of all, in Maricopa and Pima counties, judges are not elected but nominated by committees of lawyers, along with concerned citizens. How can they be expected not to be beholden to those who elevated them to the bench?
When they leave the bench, many return to large and successful law firms that leverage their names and relationships.
I'd hoped I would have ceased wasting precious time musing over the crumbling ethics of lawyers and judges by now but a confessional or exposé by one of them still sparks my curiosity.
I'm grateful for every honest glimpse into what goes wrong and how but the more I see, hear and read, the more about this profession, the more I believe our nation is at great peril due to the bullying, swindling crackpots among them.
"Judicial Deceit: Tyranny and Unnecessary Secrecy at the Michigan Supreme Court," by retired Chief Justice E. Weaver, is a depressing collection of tales about the political and child-like charades of a majority of Justices who wreaked havoc on the Court with their back-stabbing, back-slapping ways and harmed many people with their ignorant decisions.
I hope Justice Molloy's story offers hope.
Post a Comment