- its creation out of market players;
- its inclusion of "engaged experts" as its members;
- its peculiar timing in scheduling "public" hearing;
- its actual "public" hearings where the public was not invited;
- that I filed a Freedom of Information request as to all statements asking for testimony,
- appointments to the disciplinary committees;
- statistics of attorney discipline by classes of disciplined attorneys
In other words, disciplinary proceedings in New York - as in other states - bear the definite attributes of quashing competition (that's along with quashing critics of misconduct in the judiciary and in any other branch and level of the government).
- make attorney disciplinary proceedings uniform across the 4 Appellate Divisions,
- fair and efficient to attorneys while
- making them also efficient in protection of the public
- Either "get rid of a majority of the trade members, or"
- "create some oversight that passes muster"
What I am very upset about that taxpayers of the State of New York were not notified that what NEEDS to be created - and was not - was a Statewide Commission of CONCERNED TAXPAYERS interested in protecting the state budget from indemnifying the potential felons who quash competition and drum their own business behind closed doors under the guise of protecting the public from bad attorneys - when lawsuits against them for antitrust liability will start raining in.
Actually, the letter of the Consumer Union - see the link below DOES point out the need to protect state budgets from "indemnifying" liability.