The Glade 4.0

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/10/05/1 ... probe.html

Apparently, Federal Judges have denied standing to the Florida Attorney General to investigate lawyers involved in questionable foreclosure practices.

_________________

Based upon the little bit of information in that article, I'm inclined to agree with the judge, but only technically.

I disagree with the assertion that the AG's office is attempting to regulate the legal profession, as this is clearly a criminal investigation.

Ladas:

Yeah, see, that's my issue ...

If the AG can't investigate criminal behavior by lawyers, who can?

_________________

I think the issue, based upon the article anyway, is that the subpoena issued to the AG's office isn't asking for specific files related to specific cases, but it is far too broad to be a criminal investigation, and the law they are citing as the basis for the subpoena sounds like a regulatory law, not a criminal.

I suspect there is a method in place for the AG to pursue the issue, but they need to narrow the scope of the search, but the article alluded to something in the State Constitution, iirc, and I'm not familiar with that.

However, I'd be stunned if the AG's office didn't have authority to initiate criminal investigations of law firms. It just depends on the crime. Is this an ethics violation or outright fraud? And from the article, it isn't clear which the AG things has occured.

This seems pretty straight forward to me. The AG was overly vague and broad in their request for information. I would have actually figured you'd appreciate this ruling as keeping the AG a little in check from being able to give random proctology exams to anyone without enough cause.

I don't view this as the courts saying the AG can't investigate crime.

As Ladas said, this appears to be a technical issue.

He clearly stated that the AG has no authority to investigate the attorneys due to a lack of standing. The part about the case being weak was only a secondary argument.

No, he stated that the AT has no authority to regulate the law firm. He made it quite clear it was an issue with the type of information being sought and the nature of the search.

Regulate is distinct from a criminal investigation, and the article certainly suggests that the AG was looking into business operation practices under a regulatory law, not a criminal investigation of something like Fraud. That would make it an ethical question, which is the jurisdiction of the state BAR and FLSC.

Aizle:

Eh, if I thought the ruling didn't increase the propensity for fraud, I wouldn't question the language or argument of the judge's ruling. However, in our juridical system, precedents lead to all sorts of disturbing creep.

_________________

Fair enough.