|
From the Chair
 I hope this message finds all of you well and enjoying the summer. Your Disciplinary Board remains hard at work on the following events and deadlines:
First, please note that the deadline for the 2023-2024 annual attorney registration was July 1, 2023. I strongly urge all Pennsylvania attorneys who have not yet completed registration to do so as soon as possible to avoid late payment penalties or administrative suspension of his or her attorney’s license.
Second, on July 20th, a three-member panel of the Board will administer public reprimands to nine PA attorneys. Although the Board takes no pleasure in the discipline of our fellow practitioners, at times it becomes necessary to protect both the public and the profession. As with public discipline and reinstatement hearings, the reprimands will be livestreamed via the Board’s YouTube channel. The Board greatly values transparency in its work, and public access to such proceedings is central to its mission. You are all welcome to view the process, and you may find it informative because a synopsis of the case and the corresponding Rule violations are presented as part of the reprimand procedure.
Next, the Disciplinary Board launched its new “Lawyer Well-Being” webpage which was featured in June’s newsletter. The Board is very pleased by the positive response to this new resource. If you’ve not yet had the opportunity to visit the new page that connects Pennsylvania attorneys with relevant resources, articles, events, and CLE opportunities in support of their mental health and well-being, I encourage you to explore its offerings.
Finally, in 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court established an emeritus status for retired attorneys to volunteer their expertise through the provision of pro bono legal services throughout the Commonwealth. In assisting with legal aid and other nonprofit programs, these emeritus attorneys help to narrow the gap between the need for and the availability of free legal services. The Disciplinary Board has worked very hard to refine this program and to publicize and draw attention to its existence. During the past five years, a roster of highly skilled attorneys has applied for emeritus status, and the Disciplinary Board is proud to welcome additional lawyers to the fold again this year. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all who are furthering equal access to justice in Pennsylvania through their volunteer service as emeritus attorneys.
I wish you all a safe and happy summer. Throughout this season, remember to take time to recharge and care for yourself. A strong work-life balance is vital to your well-being as both a lawyer and an individual; let us all continue to look out for one another.
Stay well,
Dion G. Rassias
Board Chair
|
|
|
|
Annual Attorney Registration
Late Fees Assessed After July 16th and August 1st
The deadline for the 2023-2024 Annual Attorney Registration was July 1, 2023. Any attorney currently on active or inactive status must register via the Unified Judicial System Web Portal. Registration fees are $275 for active status and $100 for inactive status; there is no fee for those timely registering for retired status. Payment may be made online.
The first $200 late fee is assessed after July 16th, and the second $200 late fee is assessed after August 1st. These late payment penalties are imposed automatically and are not waivable by the staff or Board. An additional fee of $25 will be assessed in the event of any returned payment. Failure to complete registration by August 1st shall be deemed a request for transfer to administrative suspension under Pa. R.D.E. 219(f).
|
|
|
|
Discipline Imposed
June 2023
|
|
|
|
Reinstatements
June 2023
Note: The above-listed granted reinstatement matters reflect only those granted by Supreme Court Order. An attorney listed as reinstatement granted, but whose current license status does not reflect reinstatement, has yet to submit the fees necessary to finalize reinstatement.
|
|
|
|
Disciplinary Board News
Thirty Attorneys Take on New Hearing Committee Assignments as Sixteen Members Reappointed to Additional Terms
Hearing Committee Members perform essential roles in Pennsylvania’s disciplinary system, chief among them to review Disciplinary Counsel’s recommended dispositions and to conduct hearings into formal charges of attorney misconduct and petitions for reinstatement. These efforts, which include reviewing pleadings and briefs, weighing evidence, and writing reports, are critical to guiding the Board and the Supreme Court in their determinations.
The newly-appointed members below have committed to this substantial service to the legal profession by accepting appointments as Hearing Committee Members, effective July 1st. Also listed below are current Hearing Committee Members who have agreed to extend their tenure by accepting reappointment to an additional three-year term, effective July 1st.
|
|
|
Vacancies
The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania is aided by select boards, committees, commissions, and councils consisting of more than 180 appointed volunteers – most, but not all, are lawyers and judges.
The panels have a wide range of responsibilities and functions. Some make recommendations to the Court for amendments, revisions, or simplification of court procedural rules. Others regulate the practice of law, oversee continuing legal education for lawyers, and administer funds to assist individuals unable to pay for legal services. Still others advise on keeping the courts free of bias and discrimination and on long-range planning.
There are currently vacancies on the following panels:
Committee on Rules of Evidence – Applicants should be knowledgeable about the Pennsylvania Rules of Evidence and possess trial court experience.
Minor Court Rules Committee – Applicants should be knowledgeable about the Pennsylvania Rules of Conduct, Office Standards, and Civil Procedure for magisterial district judges and courts and be experienced in magisterial district court practice.
Application Instructions
If you would like to be considered to serve on a board, committee, advisory group, or related independent entity, email the application, cover letter, resume, and other pertinent information expressing your reasons of interest to SCApplications@pacourts.us.
More information may be found on the Unified Judicial System of Pennsylvania website.
Applications are due by July 31, 2023.
|
|
|
Upcoming Public Proceedings
We encourage you to observe our public disciplinary and reinstatement hearings, oral arguments, and public reprimands on the Board’s YouTube channel. You can also view “Upcoming Public Proceedings” at the bottom of the Board’s home page.
Scheduled proceedings begin at 9:30 am unless otherwise noted.
|
|
|
|
Articles of Interest
Lawyer Censured After Using TeamViewer to Snoop on Former Firm
A New Jersey lawyer was censured by the Supreme Court of New Jersey after the Disciplinary Review Board found that he used software to spy on a member of his firm after he left the firm.
The Disciplinary Review Board (“DRB”) found that Justin Scott was separated from his employment at the firm of Bratton Scott. The parties disagreed whether he left on his own or was terminated.
Shortly after, an attorney working on what had been Scott’s computer noticed an incoming connection to a remote access program called TeamViewer and his computer screen started moving without his input. He moved the mouse and took control of the computer. Checking the app TeamViewer on the computer, he found a connection for Justin Scott and reported the incident to the senior partner. A forensic computer company investigated and found that Scott had accessed the program six times after he left the firm. There was no evidence he copied or transferred any files.
Scott later admitted he used the program to access his former partner’s calendar and monitor his practice. The DRB concluded that the evidence showed that Scott had installed the TeamViewer program and made misrepresentations that he had not done so. The firm used a different program for remote access.
The DRB found that Scott violated the following New Jersey Rules of Professional Conduct: RPC 8.1(a) (knowingly make a false statement of material fact in a disciplinary matter); RPC 8.4(b) (commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer ); and RPC 8.4(c) (engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation). As Scott had no record of prior discipline, the Board recommended censure which the New Jersey Supreme Court imposed.
Lawyer Censured for Saying Expert “Testi-lied”
What a difference a letter makes.
The Supreme Court of Rhode Island imposed a public censure on an attorney for remarking in court that an expert witness had “testi-lied”.
The Court took the action on a report from the state’s Disciplinary Board finding that attorney Dennis D. Bossian, while cross-examining an expert witness in a motor vehicle case, stated in the course of his questioning that the expert had “testi-lied”:
Q. Let me read it. The record is going to bear out what you testi-lied to.
THE COURT: Excuse me. What was that last, testi-lied?
MR. BOSSIAN: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Testi-lied?
MR. BOSSIAN: I’m going to read --
THE COURT: Take the jury out.
The judge then attempted to caution Bossian against making such comments, but he doubled down on his criticism and requested that the court initiate proceedings for perjury against the witness. At that point, the court declared a mistrial and referred the matter to disciplinary counsel.
After an adverse recommendation by the Board, Bossian wrote a letter of apology to the court. However, the Court concluded he failed to make a timely, good-faith effort to rectify the consequences of his misconduct but instead persisted in his conduct, causing a mistrial, with its impact of time and negative financial effects upon the judicial system, the parties to the proceeding, and opposing counsel. The Court concluded that his statement violated Rule 3.4(e) of the Rhode Island Rules of Professional Conduct which prohibits a lawyer to “in trial . . . state a personal opinion as to the . . . credibility of a witness.” The Court accepted the recommendation of the Board and imposed a public censure.
Illinois Lawyer Sentenced to Prison for Hiding Bankrupt Brother’s Funds in Trust Account
A suspended former lawyer was sentenced to three years in prison by a U.S. District Judge after pleading guilty to using her trust account to help her brother hide assets from a bankruptcy proceeding.
Jan Kowalski pleaded guilty last year to concealing assets from a bankruptcy trustee for helping her brother, Robert Kowalski, hide money while representing him as an attorney in bankruptcy court.
A federal jury found Robert Kowalski guilty of embezzling $8 million from Washington Federal Bank for Savings and concealing more than $560,000 in assets from the bankruptcy trustee. Washington Federal was shut down in December 2017 amid allegations of massive fraud after its president, a close friend of Kowalski, committed suicide.
Although she claimed to have not spoken to her brother from 1980 to 2015, Ms. Kowalski assisted him by depositing more than $357,000 in her trust account and falsifying documents and making false statements to the bankruptcy court to conceal the deposit. None of the money was recovered.
Ms. Kowalski and her brother Robert, who was also a lawyer, were suspended on an interim basis by the Supreme Court of Illinois in 2021. A third sibling, William Kowalski, entered into a deferred prosecution agreement and cooperated with prosecutors.
Ms. Kowalski sought probation because she takes care of her elderly mother and her thirty-year-old son for whom she has guardianship. This did not impress U.S. District Judge Virginia Kendall who noted, “You were engaging in this activity when they were all adults and in need of help from you.” Judge Kendall sentenced Ms. Kowalski to thirty-seven months in prison.
AI Issues Continue to Arise: False Cases, Security Threats, and New Regulations and Requirements
The stories about artificial intelligence and the law just keep coming.
Lawyers Citing False Cases from ChatGPT Sanctioned
Last month, we reported on the embarrassment of two New York lawyers after a document written by one and filed by the other, relying on ChatGPT, proved to be riddled with nonexistent quotations and citations. Things have not gone well since then for Peter LoDuca and Steven A. Schwartz of the firm Levidow, Levidow & Oberman. In an Opinion and Order dated June 22, 2023, U.S. District Judge P. Kevin Castel of the Southern District of New York found that LoDuca and Schwartz engaged in bad faith, acts of conscious avoidance, and false and misleading statements to the Court. “But if the matter had ended with Respondents coming clean about their actions shortly after they received the defendant’s March 15 brief questioning the existence of the cases, …, the record now would look quite different,” the judge wrote. “Instead, the individual Respondents doubled down and did not begin to dribble out the truth until after the Court issued an Order to Show Cause why one of the individual Respondents ought not be sanctioned.” After an extended recitation of the events following the filing of the document containing the spurious cases, the judge entered an order requiring the respondents to write to their client and each judge mentioned in the fictitious citations with a copy of the decision, a transcript of the hearing, and the fake document. He also assessed a $5,000 penalty jointly and severally on the attorneys and their firm. In a separate decision, he also dismissed the client’s lawsuit on statute of limitations grounds.
In a statement to The New York Times, the law firm expressed its intent to comply with Judge Castel’s decision, but respectfully disagreed with his finding that anyone at the firm acted in bad faith. No decision whether to appeal has been reported.
Texas Judge Requires AI-Related Certificates
Perhaps in light of the controversy over AI-drafted pleadings and arguments, a federal judge in Texas has issued an Order requiring attorneys to include an AI-related certification in documents filed with the court.
Judge Brantley Starr of the Northern District of Texas posted the Order on May 30, 2023. It requires that all attorneys and pro se litigants appearing before the Court must, together with their notice of appearance, file on the docket a certificate attesting either that no portion of any filing will be drafted by generative artificial intelligence or that any language drafted by generative artificial intelligence will be checked for accuracy using print reporters or traditional legal databases by a human being. Examples of AI programs covered by the order include ChatGPT, Harvey.AI, or Google Bard.
Judge Starr opines, “These systems hold no allegiance to any client, the rule of law, or the laws and Constitution of the United States (or, as addressed above, the truth). Unbound by any sense of duty, honor, or justice, such programs act according to computer code rather than conviction, based on programming rather than principle.” He further stated that the Court would strike any filings from parties failing to certify they had read the Court’s requirements and understood they were subject to Rule 11 sanctions for failing to comply with them. The order includes a link to a template for the required certification.
Generative AI Pose Security Threats
It is clear that the compositional capabilities of AI resources set them apart from traditional legal research tools. As the above case illustrates, this poses risks, as well as opportunities, for lawyers. But as an article in the ABA Journal points out, there are multiple risks in the use of generative AI of which lawyers exploring this technology must be aware.
Matt Reynolds, staff writer for the Journal, reviews several issues and vulnerabilities of the technology. He notes a recent story about a bug in ChatGPT’s code which temporarily revealed some users’ chat histories and payment data as a “cautionary tale”. In another incident, users of the South Korean chatbot Lee-Luca also experienced unintended sharing of names and aliases in a way that threatened privacy and confidentiality.
Mark D. Rasch, a lawyer and cybersecurity and data privacy expert, notes that the generative capabilities of AI mean lawyers use the technology differently than traditional paper and online services, often using it to draft documents and entering sensitive and confidential information which can be exposed in ways unfamiliar with traditional media. Vulnerabilities in the software’s security can expose this information.
Another security risk posed by the software is the danger of malicious attacks. The sophistication of ChatGPT’s compositional capabilities makes it a powerful tool for “phishing” (the practice of sending emails or other messages appearing to be from legitimate sources in order to induce individuals to reveal personal information). It allows the composition of convincing, natural-sounding messages not displaying the poor grammar and spelling that often signals malicious communications. The Europol Innovation Lab published a report titled ChatGPT: The Impact of Large Language Models on Law Enforcement. It states that even before AI, phishing emails were “already worryingly sophisticated”, and that generative AI enables the composition of messages that appear “authentic, complex and difficult to discern from human-produced output”. The accuracy of detection tools is lagging well behind the advance of generative technology.
These developments are particularly challenging for busy people who are engaged in the business of practicing law rather than keeping up with advanced technology. As Frank J. Gillman, a principal of the professional services firm Vertex Advisors Group, puts it, “The biggest problem at any law firm is humans’ ability to be tricked.”
Generative AI also enhances the ability of cybercriminals to dupe victims with convincing deepfake audio and video. The article points to an incident in 2019 in which scammers used AI to clone a German CEO’s voice and persuade a U.K.-based executive to transfer a large sum of money to a bogus account. In another recent incident, scammers used AI to induce a Canadian couple to transfer money for their son’s legal expenses using a convincing simulation of the son’s voice. One AI company offers voice cloning services, needing only a small sample of the subject’s voice to create a simulation.
The experts quoted in the article offer suggestions as to steps firms can take to protect themselves against these risks, bolstering security measures already in place, such as multifactor authentication, offering cybersecurity awareness programs, and creating a “culture of security and privacy”. The experts agree that firms should always be aware that human error is the weakest link in any security system.
|
|
|
Around the Court
Data on Sexual Offenders in Pennsylvania Featured in New Court Infographic
The Unified Judicial System’s PA Courts InfoShare recently released a new infographic highlighting data on sexual offenders and sentences in Pennsylvania. Among other items, the infographic references the Walsh Act which aims to protect minors from sexual exploitation and violent crime. Learn more on the UJS website.
|
|
|
Attorney Well-Being
Recognizing and Combatting Revenge Bedtime Procrastination
Many within the legal profession face heavy demands on their time as they balance their workload, domestic responsibilities, and a seemingly endless list of other obligations ̶ not to mention the stress and anxiety that so often accompany this juggling act. With already limited flexibility, most lawyers are afforded very little time to enjoy leisure activities as simple as reading, watching a favorite television series, or checking in with friends and family on social media platforms. Many attempt to carve out some “me time” before bed and at the expense of much-needed sleep in the form of “revenge bedtime procrastination”.
As explored in an earlier Board article, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) advises the average adult to get seven to nine hours of sleep each night. Yet, “at least one third of American adults surveyed reported less than seven hours of sleep on average with closer to one half of participants of some racial and ethnic demographics reporting insufficient sleep.” As numerous studies have shown, quality sleep is essential to fostering good physical and mental health and is considered to be a significant public health issue.
If the importance of sleep hygiene is widely known, why is bedtime procrastination a growing problem? Noted as an “intention-behavior gap” by the Sleep Foundation, this behavior likely is linked to substantial daytime stress. The phrase “revenge bedtime procrastination” was first popularized amongst Chinese workers and students. One such individual wrote in a 2018 blog post that his days “belonged to someone else”.
Behavioral sleep medicine psychologist Alicia Roth explains, “One of the reasons why [revenge bedtime procrastination] refers to revenge is because it’s like you’re trying to exert some control over your life in a society where we have so little control. You’re taking revenge on your inability to control your life and using that little time before bed — that wind-down time — to doomscroll or do something that’s not necessarily healthy for sleep.” With arduous work schedules, many engaging in revenge bedtime procrastination feel that they must “steal back” time for themselves. This behavior may be worsened by the fact that, for many, “capacity for self-control is already at its lowest at the end of the day, which may facilitate sleep procrastination.”
How can you determine if you are engaging in revenge bedtime procrastination? According to a recent article in Psychology Today, there are a few questions that can be asked to help identify revenge bedtime procrastination.
- Does your daily or weekly schedule tend to be overwhelming without any reserved and honored leisure time?
- Do you feel a loss of autonomy in your daily or weekly schedule? Are you exhibiting symptoms of burnout?
- Do you regularly delay going to sleep, cutting into your ideal bedtime?
- Why are you staying up later than intended? Do you seek needed “me time” at the end of your day?
- Even though you may acknowledge that you will be tired the following day, do you notice yourself willingly losing sleep in exchange for leisure or alone time?
After identifying some of the determining factors and behaviors of revenge bedtime procrastination, there are some simple actions that can be taken to prevent or lessen this tendency. What are some actionable practices for combatting revenge bedtime procrastination?
- Narrow your after-hours to-do list by prioritizing just one or two activities to focus on each night.
- Avoid use of digital screens, including cell phones and tablets, for at least one hour before bedtime.
- Stick to a routine tailored to your own needs and preferences. Bodily cues indicating tiredness can develop with habitual sleep times.
- Incorporate relaxation methods such as meditation or gentle stretching into your bedtime routine to help ease you into sleep.
- Read the Board’s 2022 article “Sleep Hygiene, Mental Health, and the Legal Profession” for more practical tips for encouraging good sleep hygiene.
In a demanding legal career, revenge bedtime procrastination may seem like a tempting practice for those seeking much-deserved downtime. However, the physical and mental effects of sleep deficiency can be severe and damaging. With intentional and reflective planning, it is possible to balance downtime with getting sufficient and productive sleep, investing in one’s own health and happiness.
Explore the Disciplinary Board's New Lawyer Well-Being Webpage
The Disciplinary Board recently released a new "Lawyer Well-Being" webpage that connects Pennsylvania attorneys with pertinent resources, articles, events, and CLE opportunities to better understand and support their mental health and well-being. To access the Board’s new “Lawyer Well-Being” page, visit padisciplinaryboard.org/for-attorneys/well-being.
Lawyers Concerned for Lawyers is a confidential assistance program for the Pennsylvania legal community and their family members. LCL may not report information about a subject attorney back to the Disciplinary Board.
Confidential 24/7 Helpline: 1-888-999-1941
|
|
|
From the Pennsylvania Bar Association
PBA Membership Offers Something to Every Practice
It’s an exciting time to be a member of the Pennsylvania Bar Association! Current members, consider taking advantage of more of the benefits and services that are available to you. For those not already a member, consider joining now at 50% off! There is something at the PBA to elevate all members’ law practice and professional life. For example:
- Concerned about the impact of artificial intelligence on the legal field? That’s why PBA created its Technology Committee, and members can join any of PBA’s many committees at no extra cost. The July/August issue of PBA’s award-winning legal magazine features two articles on AI: “A Cautionary Tale of AI as a Research Tool” and “The Not-So-Quiet Revolution: AI and the Practice of Law”. PBA has made this entire issue of The Pennsylvania Lawyer available to the Board’s newsletter readers.
- Want to test knowledge and understanding about IOLTA accounts or just need a quick refresher on obligations under the Pennsylvania Rules of Professional Conduct? Be sure to read “Everything You Need to Know About Your IOLTA Account: A Checklist for Ethical Rule Compliance” in the latest edition of The PA Lawyer.
- Get to know PBA’s Executive Director, Matt Holliday. He is excited to be an advocate for the legal profession, provide high level support for members, and build on the great work of his predecessors. In his article in latest issue of The PA Lawyer, Holliday shares how everyone can find their niche within the PBA, tailoring membership to fit individual needs and goals.
- Current PBA President Mike McDonald focuses on how the PBA helps make good lawyers better ̶ better able to serve their clients, better able to be leaders in their communities, and better able to serve and enhance the administration of justice. Read his brief article in The PA Lawyer exploring the many ways the PBA can be a regular resource to lawyer’s typical workday.
- The July/August 2023 issue of The PA Lawyer also features its regular ethics digest, a review of recent discipline, entry into the 2023 Short Story Fiction Contest (August 7th deadline), HOA liability law, effective lawyering, attracting and retaining staff, benefits and services for lawyers, and so much more.
Please note that the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Bar Association (PBA) are separate organizations. For more information about PBA, visit their website.
|
|
|
We Want To Hear From You...
We are always on the lookout for stories of interest relating to legal ethics, new issues in the practice of law, lawyer wellness, and funny or just plain weird stories about the legal profession. If you come across something you think might be enlightening, educational, or entertaining to our readers or social media followers, pass it along. If you are our original source, there may be a hat tip in it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
