PJ Media

Mr. Adams, thanks for making the decision that our ethics profs in law school said we might have to make in our career: Choosing between what is ethically right or what is politically expedient (and may cost you your job). Sounds like a simple call, but in political organizations subservient to a political master who does not live by our lawyer’s Code of Professional Responsibility, its much more of a soul-searching matter, with much at risk beyond integrity.
I’m the former Deputy Attorney General (Envir. Protection) in my state, appointed directly by the elected Attorney General.From ’93-94, I was lead trial/appellate counsel and supervised 7 other attorneys (all older than I),plus staff/paralegals. Our client was the state Div. of Environmental Protection (DEP) and we defended its actions and prosecuted civil actions to enforce state and federal environmental laws. Environmental politics were big (still are) in WV in the early ’90′s. I won a highly publicized,hard fought landfill siting case in one of our counties close to DC. The state court rejected the challenges by enviro groups to my client’s decision to approve the siting of a “state of the art” landfill (approved by EPA) as the only responsible solid waste facility capable of serving the 5-county area. (all others were over 40yrs old, non-compliant, leaking, etc. and had to be closed).
Pressured by the same enviro groups that had lost, the Attorney General (AG)demanded that my office file a “Motion to Reconsider” to reverse the court’s decision that we’d just briefed, argued and won. The elected AG had no trial experience and I advised him that I had a Rule 11 objection to sabotaging my client’s case by signing off on a brief that adopts arguments that I not only knew to to be legally and factually unfounded but I had just proven so before the trial judge! Not only do I have a Rule 11 problem with this but he’s demanding that I file a pleading detrimental to my client (DEP)in the case I’d just won.
I was then instructed to file a “Motion to Withdraw” from representing my client, the Div. of Environmental Protection. And in the motion, I was to state that my client was wrong on the law and the facts and also that no substitute counsel should be appointed to represent the client’s now divergent interests! I’ve handled many cases and rarely, very rarely, can you withdraw from representing a client. And when you can, you must preserve the client’s case and do your utmost to assist in obtaining substitute counsel–not leave them unrepresented like the AG argued I had to do.
I refused of course. I was told that I would be fired if I did not comply. I called my law school ethics prof and ran the scenario by him. He said: “I just got of the phone with the AG. He said he has some political disagreement with your client and wants you to file a motion to reconsider.” I said:”Did he tell you about demanding that I withdraw from the case and that no one should be appointed to represent my client’s interests?” “Oops, no, he left that out, of course you can’t do that.”
My client filed state bar ethics charges against the AG. I was subpeonaed as the lead attorney and Deputy Attorney General. I could not testify unless I resigned. I did. The State Bar Disciplinary Panel ruled unanimously that in attempting to have his subordinates file pleadings that violated their good faith believe under Rule 11 that he’d violated the Code of Professional Responsibility. The WV Supreme Court of Appeals, upon review, ratified the Bar decision 5-0.
This is where things change. After resigning, I was hired by my client, the Div. of Environmental Protection. I hired all lawyers, staff and paralegals away from the AG’s office to set up a new legal office. The AG sued arguing only he could provide legal services to state agencies. I argued the case and it didn’t look good for the AG to argue that only he could represent state agencies but if his political constituencies disagreed with that agency, he could refuse to represent it and then prohibit it from obtaining qualified counsel elsewhere. We won and later even changed the law to create a separate legal office in our Environmental Protection division.
But politicians do not forget ethical acts that embarass them. After serving as General Counsel for 7 Directors of DEP, through 3 Governors, an appointee who wanted to run for the House in Congress became the new DEP Director. He needed the labor union votes that the AG, who’d weathered his public reprimand for ethics violations, could deliver. But the AG had a price. Me, his former deputy. Ethics and doing the right thing are something we’re taught and are often told that we’ll be quite alone when the time comes. I know that to be true and an ethical stance may cost a career.
That’s why I admire what Mr. Adams has chosen to do. Bill Adams