• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Latest Scandal! Comic Book Dealer Disbarred As Lawyer!!!!

Started by Shield,

1,034 posts in this topic

esquirecomics

esquirecomics

Posted
Posted
Perhaps he needed to "borrow" these funds for the X-Men #1 and subsequent resubs? 893whatthe.gif

 

So Mark, being an Attorney and familiar with these types of offenses, is this something that a lawyer could easily overlook by accident or mistakenly do? I would think as the court did, that his length of time being a lawyer, he should have, and probably did know better. I'm just still trying to gauge the effect this should have on his character and to know how bad these offenses are (I'm thinking very bad).

 

Many of these offenses, all of which were sustained (i.e., proven, and even Doug then decided not to contest the merits further, he only sought to mitigate the punishment) happen to solo or small firm practitioners, especially when cash flow is slow. Money is taken from Paul to pay Peter and when more funds come in from Mary you can repay Paul without his ever knowing his funds were missing.

 

While law school is notorious for not teaching ethical realities and instead focuses on absurd ethical situations, the one thing you do learn from day one is to never commingle your funds with clients funds. One cannot "accidently" commit this violation (except if perhaps you mistakenly deposit a check into the wrong account, but I am taking isolated incidents, not a pattern). Certainly it is not beyond the pale that an attorney's bookkeeping records may not be up to speed. That is why we hire CPAs for one thing.

 

Here is the substantive kicker from the decision:

 

In his report, the Referee set forth his findings of fact and conclusions of law, and agreed with the Committee that disbarment was appropriate, citing the intentional conversion of funds of an elderly client to whom settlement proceeds were finally disbursed after almost two years and only after the client's niece threatened to report respondent to the "bar association;" a pattern of misappropriating escrow funds of 22 other clients; multiple instances of commingling personal funds with client funds; and lack of mitigation.

 

Essentially, as I interpret the above, Doug was taking or at least "temporarily" using client money for his own use until he was forced or otherwise decided to distribute the funds to either the client or properly earn them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qualitycomix

qualitycomix

Posted
Posted

Many of these offenses, all of which were sustained (i.e., proven, and even Doug then decided not to contest the merits further, he only sought to mitigate the punishment) happen to solo or small firm practitioners, especially when cash flow is slow. Money is taken from Paul to pay Peter and when more funds come in from Mary you can repay Paul without his ever knowing his funds were missing.

 

Funny you mention the taking from Paul to pay Peter scenario as that is what I had heard thathe was doing to in the comics field when he was just a collector. Always one step ahead to get the book(s) that he needed for his collection. Nothing illegal about doing that with comics, mind you. Just funny, the way you worded it, as those were the exact words that I heard used to describe his collecting habits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
esquirecomics

esquirecomics

Posted
Posted

Many of these offenses, all of which were sustained (i.e., proven, and even Doug then decided not to contest the merits further, he only sought to mitigate the punishment) happen to solo or small firm practitioners, especially when cash flow is slow. Money is taken from Paul to pay Peter and when more funds come in from Mary you can repay Paul without his ever knowing his funds were missing.

 

Funny you mention the taking from Paul to pay Peter scenario as that is what I had heard thathe was doing to in the comics field when he was just a collector. Always one step ahead to get the book(s) that he needed for his collection. Nothing illegal about doing that with comics, mind you. Just funny, the way you worded it, as those were the exact words that I heard used to describe his collecting habits.

 

I know of other major comic book dealers who have been doing the same thing. Illegal? By no means. Unprofessional? Unethical? Depends on whether the dealers pay their debts on time and in full. Some do. Some don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scheradon

Scheradon

Posted
Posted
Perhaps he needed to "borrow" these funds for the X-Men #1 and subsequent resubs? 893whatthe.gif

 

So Mark, being an Attorney and familiar with these types of offenses, is this something that a lawyer could easily overlook by accident or mistakenly do? I would think as the court did, that his length of time being a lawyer, he should have, and probably did know better. I'm just still trying to gauge the effect this should have on his character and to know how bad these offenses are (I'm thinking very bad).

 

Many of these offenses, all of which were sustained (i.e., proven, and even Doug then decided not to contest the merits further, he only sought to mitigate the punishment) happen to solo or small firm practitioners, especially when cash flow is slow. Money is taken from Paul to pay Peter and when more funds come in from Mary you can repay Paul without his ever knowing his funds were missing.

 

While law school is notorious for not teaching ethical realities and instead focuses on absurd ethical situations, the one thing you do learn from day one is to never commingle your funds with clients funds. One cannot "accidently" commit this violation (except if perhaps you mistakenly deposit a check into the wrong account, but I am taking isolated incidents, not a pattern). Certainly it is not beyond the pale that an attorney's bookkeeping records may not be up to speed. That is why we hire CPAs for one thing.

 

Here is the substantive kicker from the decision:

 

In his report, the Referee set forth his findings of fact and conclusions of law, and agreed with the Committee that disbarment was appropriate, citing the intentional conversion of funds of an elderly client to whom settlement proceeds were finally disbursed after almost two years and only after the client's niece threatened to report respondent to the "bar association;" a pattern of misappropriating escrow funds of 22 other clients; multiple instances of commingling personal funds with client funds; and lack of mitigation.

 

Essentially, as I interpret the above, Doug was taking or at least "temporarily" using client money for his own use until he was forced or otherwise decided to distribute the funds to either the client or properly earn them.

 

Thanks Mark, you answered my questions perfectly thumbsup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qualitycomix

qualitycomix

Posted
Posted

Many of these offenses, all of which were sustained (i.e., proven, and even Doug then decided not to contest the merits further, he only sought to mitigate the punishment) happen to solo or small firm practitioners, especially when cash flow is slow. Money is taken from Paul to pay Peter and when more funds come in from Mary you can repay Paul without his ever knowing his funds were missing.

 

Funny you mention the taking from Paul to pay Peter scenario as that is what I had heard thathe was doing to in the comics field when he was just a collector. Always one step ahead to get the book(s) that he needed for his collection. Nothing illegal about doing that with comics, mind you. Just funny, the way you worded it, as those were the exact words that I heard used to describe his collecting habits.

 

I know of other major comic book dealers who have been doing the same thing. Illegal? By no means. Unprofessional? Unethical? Depends on whether the dealers pay their debts on time and in full. Some do. Some don't.

 

I had heard of outstanding debts for books that he had purchased and took years to pay back. Some dealers stopped doing business with him because of the length of time being taken to get paid. Disclaimer - all 2nd hand knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
esquirecomics

esquirecomics

Posted
Posted
Well.......... as it comes to ASM's ...... I'm a Buyer !! As always !! Already bought one, and supposedly have 3 on "reserve"..... The ASM market won't crash as long as I have Cash...... hey, that rhymes.... acclaim.gif

 

Perfect example of why some things in this hobby will never change. Money talks. All other messages can be ignored. foreheadslap.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qualitycomix

qualitycomix

Posted
Posted
Well.......... as it comes to ASM's ...... I'm a Buyer !! As always !! Already bought one, and supposedly have 3 on "reserve"..... The ASM market won't crash as long as I have Cash...... hey, that rhymes.... acclaim.gif

 

Perfect example of why some things in this hobby will never change. Money talks. All other messages can be ignored. foreheadslap.gif

 

That was exactly the comment I was going to make. David, you know I love ya, but would you buy a book from the devil if it was the right book at the right price?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
esquirecomics

esquirecomics

Posted
Posted
Mark, how would this disbarring in NY affect his ability to practice law in Florida. Assuming he is licensed to practice law in Florida.

 

I actually just answered your question on the other boards! foreheadslap.gif

 

The disbarrment only applies to his NY license.

 

However, when one state imposes disciplinary action against an attorney it is often the case that any other jurisdiction where that attorney is licensed will follow suit with some course of action as well. Not necessarily, but often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WallStreet Trader-migratio

WallStreet Trader-migratio

Posted
Posted

I already did....... it's more of an "addiction" that a sound investment decision.... one based mostly on emotions...... if they ever open up a Comics Anonymous, I'd like to be the first patient.... especially if they have a program tailored for ASM junkies..... as far as the Devil question goes, that depends if its a PEDIGREE ??? I'm a Sucka for PEDIGREES .... I'd sell my soul for a PC or Mass Copy ... lolyay.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qualitycomix

qualitycomix

Posted
Posted
I already did....... it's more of an "addiction" that a sound investment decision.... one based mostly on emotions...... if they ever open up a Comics Anonymous, I'd like to be the first patient.... especially if they have a program tailored for ASM junkies..... as far as the Devil question goes, that depends if its a PEDIGREE ??? I'm a Sucka for PEDIGREES .... I'd sell my soul for a PC or Mass Copy ... lolyay.gif

 

Well, at least you're honest about your addiction. foreheadslap.gif

 

And so the cycle continues. And we wonder how the disreputable stay in business?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

Im pretty shocked about DOUG. I heard for quite awhile now that he was always running behind payments, building the house, buying comics etc. But this comingling of funds?? Tha's always been the last resort of the shyster loser lawyer who has painted themselves into a corner financially. Seems comics collecting IS just for the rich, or those with (ahem) access to funds!

 

Seems to have been a pattern that had been pretty extensive from the ruling...22 clients? Was this just Doug or the rest of his NY law firm too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
qualitycomix

qualitycomix

Posted
Posted
Im pretty shocked about DOUG. I heard for quite awhile now that he was always running behind payments, building the house, buying comics etc. But this comingling of funds?? Tha's always been the last resort of the shyster loser lawyer who has painted themselves into a corner financially. Seems comics collecting IS just for the rich, or those with (ahem) access to funds!

 

Seems to have been a pattern that had been pretty extensive from the ruling...22 clients? Was this just Doug or the rest of his NY law firm too?

 

I think he and his dad were the partners of the firm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing