The insurance company for attorney Richard Schwartz settled a lawsuit filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court by Shirley Douglas and the trustee. Ms. Douglas sued Mr.Schwartz and former attorney Vann Leonard after Mr. Leonard embezzled $327,000 of a $500,000 settlement Ms. Douglas received from damages suffered in an automobile accident. Mr. Schwartz's insurance company will pay $265,000 to the court.
The trustee accused local attorneys Richard Schwartz and Vann Leonard of "misappropriating" a settlement of $500,000 in a complaint filed in bankruptcy court. Shirley Douglas was injured in an auto accident in June 2007. She retained Schwartz & Associates to recover damages from the other driver. Ms. Douglas filed a chapter 13 bankruptcy petition in July 2009. Schwartz obtained a $500,000 settlement for Ms. Douglas. She signed a standard contingency-fee agreement giving Schwartz a third of her settlement for his fee. Schwartz then hired attorney Vann Leonard to help obtain court approval of the settlement. The court approved the settlement and allowed Schwartz to collect $172,414 in attorney's fees. Mr. Leonard never tendered the remaining $327,585 to the court or Ms. Douglas. Instead of receiving her money, Ms. Douglas was forced to suffer the humiliation and expense of having her wages garnished to pay her creditors. The court lifted the garnishment order earlier this year. Earlier post
Mr. Leonard pleaded guilty to one count of embezzlement in federal court in February. Mr. Leonard currently resides in the Rankin County Jail courtesy of a contempt of court finding in Chancellor Grant's courtroom after he did not return to the court $110,000 taken from the Downing estate. Mr. Leonard has been disbarred by the Mississippi Bar.
The settlement was filed on November 21, 2011. Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, the insurer for Mr. Schwartz, will pay $265,000 to the trustee. The trustee will pay $30,000 to attorney Selene Maddox for representing the trustee. The remainder of the funds will be used to pay Ms. Douglas's creditors. Any remaining funds are paid to Ms. Douglas and her attorney, Philip Thomas. Ms. Schwartz received $132,457 in fees.
18 comments:
So, what did Schwartz do wrong?
Congrats Phillip! Great work.
I was going to make a soft comment regarding WhereTheSunDon'tShineXerox,, but I am inspired to toss a gratuitous left and say:
You are an idiot. You want everyone to do your work for you. You need to freaking learn to read and read often. Your inability to see this story is an end-state and your inability to take the time to look at this site before you comment has eluded you several times on this site.
And, your grammar is ok.
Who the hell is Phillip and what on earth are you babbling about this time?
Try reading the post. I even included links to earlier posts so even you could figure out what was going on.
I couldn't enlarge the legal documents so I may have overlooked reference to Phillip. What do you mean by 'even you'? Can't you let Kangaroo speak for himself for once?
one call, thats all.........
NOT DOING IT. My statement stands.
More evidence-based content based on solid research. Thanks Kingfish.
Richie employed Leonard and created a joint venture; he has vicarious liability for the torts of Leonard as a result. Its the same as if a truck driver for WalMart runs over you; both the driver and WalMart are liable for the damages.
Thanks 6:16. See how easy (and mature) that was KF?
just saw little richard's new commercial on wlbt; wearing some outlandish red jumpsuit and bad special effects of him jumping off a building and flying through downtown jacktown.
stay classy ricky.
Not every lawyer aspires to have a life sized oil painting of himself in his foyer. Richie makes his millions while jumping off tall buildings and landing in the bank.
he has no honor. and is a rich (but poor) atty, was just the first one to wallow in the mud that is atty advertising.
Oh, how I would love to see a ban on all lawyer advertising...in everything....not just TV but the phone book, too.
And, secondly, ban all advertising for prescription drugs. Let the lawyers figure out another way to troll for suits against the drug manufacturers.
I would also welcome a ban on attorney advertising. As an attorney who represents folks against insurance companies for all types of losses, I can say with confidence that most of my peers agree that television and billboard advertising create a very poor perception of plaintiff's lawyers.
Also, most attorneys on our side of the bar would agree that the big advertisers have made the decision to use their ability to bring in money by volume at the detriment of their own reputations. They certainly don't worry about what they're doing to the reputation of other attorneys in the same field.
It's unfortunate, but it is the reality. The good news is that it gives smaller firms that don't operate in that way a very good chance to prove that they are better.
I often retain clients who originally signed with an advertising firm but became unsatisfied when their attorney failed to ever meet them or return their calls.
Andrew M. Newcomb
Schwartz is only loosely a "lawyer," I hear; basically, his office negotiates settlements with insurance companies.
That is not necessarily a bad thing, tho one suspects many people could get about the same settlement without paying 40% of it to S.
Have any of our lawyerly readers ever seen him try a case?
What is the latest on the Van Leonard story?
Andrew, I will grant you there are many attorneys who represent those who are truly injured in their insurance claims through non-payment. Most of the time, the insurance companies just want to hear face to face (at the level of involving an attorney) the reality of the situation. I'm sure that many here would agree, when you get to the table, it is pretty much settled.
That said, those attorneys who file frivolously more than twice should face sanctions.
I think the ads are tacky and also believe that attorneys are pretty smart. They know the game. They know what to say, and more importantly what NOT to say.
The problem is some bottom feeders are quick to take advantage of the system to their own ends. Hopefully, the end is the end of their practice.
Post a Comment