|
Self-regulation exists for all licensed professions. This is nothing new or revolutionary.
To go back to something Geeky Penguin said- you are right that those who sign on to these lawsuits are doing so willingly.
My contention is that a licensed attorney has a duty to all of those clients just as I, as a CPA and licensed broker-dealer principal, have a duty to my clients.
Working class men and women who suffered as a result of exposure to asbestos had very few options- especially those living in rural areas that were, in many cases, "company towns".
People like you and me don't get paid 3 digits an hour to just do what our client wants. A big part of earning our fee is in guiding our clients through that decision process to help them understand what is in their best interests.
In my view, it does not matter that the clients in this case had a "choice" to not enter a class action.
The attorney, being the one well versed in the various legal options, is presumed to helped that client make the right choice for himself.
And any attorney who attaches a serious asbestos claim to a massive class action suit in order to add value to that suit, and his fee, at the expense of the client with a serious claim- is acting in an unethical manner pure and simple.
On the face of it, a reasonable person would look at some of these asbestos class action suits and conclude that an attorney was acting in his own interests at the expense of his clients and the common good.
Complaining about it and getting action is another matter- and that is where I have a concern because I have personally witnessed flagrant ethical violations that have not been addressed at all. It was not my place in those jobs to be the one to complain- but if I someday find myself in that position I most certainly will take action.
(PS- I am not accusing you of being unethical because we might disagree- just trying to frame this as I see it and let the discussion go deeper.)
|
Threaded Mode
