Thursday, December 20, 2007

Billing Misconduct Charges Against Contract Lawyer

On the false billing front, the Illinois ARDC recently filed charges alleging that an attorney employed by a temp service at $35 per hour to conduct a document review for Mayer Brown. The charges allege that the attorney worked a shade less than 52 hours but billed for 135 hours. Let's see if it takes the Illinois disciplinary system over nine years to resolve this case (as D.C. took in a case posted earlier today). Since this matter involves a contract lawyer, rather than a highly compensated partner in a major firm (as in the D.C. case), I suspect the result will be both faster and less sympathetic to the accused lawyer. (Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Billing Misconduct Charges Against Contract Lawyer:


I am sure it will not take so long, but I am not so sure the difference will be contract attorney vs. biglaw partner. Your other various posts on both D.C. and Illinois have persuaded me that there are big differences in their discipline systems -- procedurally, substantively, and in terms of public access. So the difference here may be simple geography.

Posted by: Alan Childress | Dec 20, 2007 10:51:04 AM

I finally posted on this - here. This is outrageous! How hypocritical for law firms to treat contract attorneys as glorified paralegals, then turn around and treat them as real lawyers when it comes to ethics violations.

Posted by: Carolyn Elefant | Dec 22, 2007 8:14:08 AM

Post a comment