| |
 |
State of Maine v. Michael A. Doyle
Lawyers: Reply to Itemized Bills August 28, 2002 Ms. Jaye Malcolm Trimm Dear Ms. Trimm: RE: FAD #02-21-G / Doyle v. VanDyke I renew my objection to the filing of the time-detailed itemized billing statement from VanDyke as filed with Richard O'Brien directly by e-mail. However, it is instructive to note that the detailed report of the first four entries do not show any conflicts disclosure to Doyle. Nor, that the contents of the memos and letters from Dyer and DeTroy were discussed. This lack of disclosure gave rise to this complaint, the fraud that induced Doyle to use VanDyke as defense counsel, VanDyke lies to Doyle to keep Doyle as a client, VanDyke's use of those lies to force Doyle into not one but two guilty pleas, and finally putting Doyle in prison for 14 months. I hope that the panel holds lawyers to a high enough standard that it is not the merely overcharging of fees that should be refunded, but that the dishonest method of acquiring clients and fees should not be condoned by the watch dog panel whose duty it is to protect the public from professional dishonesty and to uphold the public trust in the legal profession as a whole. Respectfully submitted, Michael A. Doyle
| |||||||
