For prior coverage and background information, please visit the following links: http://tinyurl.com/3s2tjxz , http://tinyurl.com/42t7zkj , http://tinyurl.com/3eotzfs , http://tinyurl.com/3s82ac4 , http://tinyurl.com/3rjqm3v
Dear Mr Hawley:
This will serve to formally update you regarding newly-discovered
evidence pertaining to the scheme executed by your office, Howard Rice Canady Falk & Rabkin, and others relating to the decisions which resulted in Jerome Falk of Howard Rice acting as a special deputy trial counsel to examine attorney misconduct in the litigation against Dole.
Within the past few days, I learned that Howard Rice Canady Falk & Rabkin actually REPRESENTED the law offices of Girardi & Keese and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack.
In plain English, Girardi & Keese and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack were (and very likely are) clients of Howard Rice Canady Falk & Rabkin.
The case at issue is entitled Copple v. Estrella & Rice (case number 3:2005 cv03961 JSW) 442 F.Supp.2d 829 (2006). It was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on September 29, 2005 by Robert Copple (represented by Lindley & Wood).
As the rules of professional conduct make very clear that an attorney can never represent another party in an action adverse to a current or former client, it was improper for Howard Rice and Jerome Falk to accept the invitation to act as special deputy trial counsel.
Similarly, it was improper for the State Bar to make such a
designation. It was improper for everyone involved to maintain secrecy over the relationship, particularly the law offices of Skadden Arps, and partners Thomas Nolan and Alec Chang.
In addition to filing the ethics complaint with BOG/RAD and the Intake Office, I also communicated my concerns to Douglas Winthrop, Sean SeLegue, and Pamela Phillips of Howard Rice, and also invited them to disclose all other cases which potentially give rise to a conflict of interest. None of these individuals ever responded.
In fact, Howard Rice, Girardi & Keese as well as Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack , actively and by omission, took actions to conceal the matter.
This unfair and unlawful conduct caused injury to the people of the State of California, Dole Food Company, the federal judiciary, the fair administration of justice, as well as to yours truly.
In my view, the fact that Howard Rice and Engstrom Lipscomb & Lack had an attorney-client relationship is by far the most compelling and credible evidence I have submitted to date concerning this matter. As such, and however futile, I must renew my request that the OCTC and RAD take the appropriate actions.
Thank you for your time.
To view the case of Copple vs. Astrella, please visit : http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=20061271442FSupp2d829_11197.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006