The Louisiana Supreme Court disbarred New Orleans attorney Ashton O'Dwyer. Mr. O'Dwyer was a favorite target, I mean topic, over at NMC's blog when he was still alive. JJ would be remiss in not honoring NMC by posting this decision. It's rather entertaining but then again, the subject is Ashton O'Dwyer. Here are some of the more, um, interesting passages from the decision:
Meanwhile, in a separate federal lawsuit filed by respondent, he contended that, within twelve hours of filing the complaint in the Katrina class action litigation, the Louisiana State Police forcibly abducted him from his home in the middle of the night and delivered him to a temporary detention facility at the Union Passenger Terminal (“Camp Amtrak”), where he was shot with “bean bag rounds” from a twelve-gauge shotgun, blasted with pepper spray, and held in a small cage. To this day, respondent believes there is a connection between what he describes as this “gangland-style ‘hit’” ordered on him by “someone” and the “‘treatment’ I have enjoyed in the ‘Victims of KATRINA’ litigation, courtesy of the lawyers within the Louisiana Department of ‘Injustice,’ courtesy of the Plaintiffs’ Liaison Committee, who are ‘supposed’ to be representing me and my clients, and possibly even ‘courtesy’ of Judge Duval...”
In yet another federal lawsuit, respondent alleged that former Chief Justice Catherine Kimball and Chief Disciplinary Counsel Charles Plattsmier were also involved in the conspiracy against him, because he made statements to the news media after Hurricane Katrina that embarrassed Justice Kimball. According to respondent, Justice Kimball told Mr. Plattsmier and other state officials during a meeting on September 11, 2005 that “somebody has to shut that guy up [referring to respondent]; he’s giving us all a bad name.” In response, Mr. Plattsmier allegedly stated that he knew some of respondent’s law partners and would contact them to learn more about him. Respondent claimed that these statements by Justice Kimball and Mr. Plattsmier led to actions by others that culminated in his September 20, 2005 incarceration at “Camp Amtrak” and his termination from his law firm on September 23, 2005. Respondent’s suit against Justice Kimball and Mr. Plattsmier was dismissed by the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in February 2009....
Violation of Rule 3.5(d) (engaging in conduct intended to disrupt a tribunal) – Respondent used abusive language toward the federal court in the following instances: (1) regarding Judge Duval’s conclusions that a pleading filed by respondent was duplicative and frivolous and should be stricken from the record, respondent stated that Judge Duval acted “for an illicit purpose,” (2) respondent stated that the PLC was “anointed” by Judge Duval, whom he implied was corrupt, (3) regarding two members of the PLC, respondent alleged that “these very same lawyers, who are ‘supposed’ to be representing the interests of ‘the Class,’ including me and my clients, HAVE BEEN SLEEPING WITH THE DEVIL, namely the State of Louisiana and its Department of ‘Injustice,’ all behind my back!”...
In response to the en banc order, respondent filed on November 11, 2008 a pleading captioned “Declaration of His Intentionally Contemptuous Non- Compliance with the Court’s Order of 11/07/08.” In this “Declaration,” respondent advised the en banc federal court that “it may as well disbar him, forever, because he has no intention of ever complying” with the requirements of the suspension order. Indeed, respondent added, he would submit to the anger management classes required by the en banc order “only upon the condition that each Member of the Court first complete ‘charm school.’”....
Over the course of several months between March and July 2009, respondent sent numerous e-mails to the DCAH in which he threatened frivolous civil rights and RICO lawsuits and used racial slurs, obscenities, and other unprofessional and discourteous language. The slurs and obscenities were directed to DCAH, opposing counsel, former Chief Justice Catherine Kimball, and Chief Disciplinary Counsel Charles Plattsmier....
On July 15, 2009, while respondent was suspended from the practice of law, he filed a pleading captioned “Defendant’s Memorandum in Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment” in the matter entitled “In re Ocean-Oil Expert Witness, Inc. v. O’Dwyer,” bearing Docket Number 07-3129(B) in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The motion was filed under the signature of respondent’s cousin, attorney Joseph W.P. Hecker,7 and contained disparaging and racially offensive language. When Chief Disciplinary Counsel Charles Plattsmier submitted an inquiry to Mr. Hecker regarding this pleading, respondent acknowledged by mail that he had written the pleading, took “full responsibility for the content of the language” in the pleading, and acknowledged that he had signed the pleading in the name of his cousin. The letter addressed to Mr. Plattsmier was replete with foul and obscene language....
On July 27, 2009, respondent filed with the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana a letter in which he used racially demeaning, openly contemptuous, and derogatory language toward Judge Ivan Lemelle. As a result of this correspondence, the court issued an order barring respondent’s access to the federal courthouse at 500 Poydras Street in New Orleans....
Also convey to Judge Brown a reminder that I have been totally without money since the weekend of January 8, 9, and 10, and that I have been without my anti-depressant medication, for which I have sought leave to pay Walgreen’s from my most recent Social Security check, since last weekend. I could not sleep last night, which I attribute to the effects of abruptly stopping my medication on Sunday, the 24th (my pills “ran out,” and I have no money to purchase more). Maybe my creditors would benefit from my suicide, but suppose I become “homicidal?” Given the recent “security breach” at 500 Poydras Street, a number of scoundrels might be at risk if I DO become homicidal. Please ask His Honor to consider allowing me to refill my prescription at Walgreen’s, and allowing me to pay them, which is a condition for my obtaining a refill. Please communicate this missive to creditors and their counsel. Thank you. [Emphasis added.]....
You can't make this up. NMC had some interesting experiences with him as well.
3 comments:
respondent added, he would submit to the anger management classes required by the en banc order “only upon the condition that each Member of the Court first complete ‘charm school.’
This is a classic AOD response.
Wow, I thought he had been disbarred years ago
I had a case he was involved in; not your normal lawyer, but no dummy. I've had worse attys to deal with.
Post a Comment