| |
 |
State of Maine v. Michael A. Doyle
Lawyers: Malpractice January 9, 2004 Board of Overseers of the Bar To Whom It May Concern: RE: Berman & Simmons and Their Partners Jack Simmons, David VanDyke and Julian Sweet The enclosed letter from the Attorney General's office for the State of Maine discloses that the firm of Berman & Simmons, Jack Simmons, David VanDyke, and Julian Sweet had knowledge of the following violations of The Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 3.4 (b)(1). "Basic Rule. A lawyer shall not commence or continue representation of a client if the representation would involve a conflict of interest, except as permitted by this rule. Representation would involve a conflict of interest if there is substantial risk that the lawyer's representation of one client would materially and adversely affected by the lawyer's duties to another current client, to a former client, or to a third person, or BY THE LAWYER'S OWN INTEREST". (Emphasis added) Such knowledge of VanDyke's legal malpractice case starting six weeks prior to the coercing of a second guilty plea while VanDyke was being defended by my chief accuser, Peter DeTroy, constitutes a violation of the above cited rule. The knowledge of this violation by the firm of Berman & Simmons and the partners Simmons and Sweet and the cover up during the 2002 complaint (a copy of the 9-2-02 findings letter attached) either demonstrates complicity in their cover up or a deficiency in the Board's pursuit of the truth and a severe dereliction of the Board's duty to the public in general and the Complainant in particular. "General Rule. Except with the informed written consent of the client, a lawyer shall not commence representation if there is a substantial risk that any FINANCIAL INTEREST OR SIGNIFICANT PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP OF THE LAWYER WILL MATERIALLY AND ADVERSELY AFFECT THE LAWYER'S REPRESENTATION OF THE CLIENT". (Emphasis added) The above is Rule 3.4(f)(1). Can it be any greater violation of these rules by Berman & Simmons et.al., than to have my chief accuser providing counsel to my lawyer and law firm while I depend on the very same lawyer and law firm to aggressively cross examine Peter DeTroy, the lawyer that Berman & Simmons depends on to save them perhaps hundreds of thousands of dollars as defendants in their own case? I would request a more thorough investigation of these charges by the Board and a more realistic response from the Board than previously received. Sincerely, Michael A. Doyle
| |||||||
