Monday, December 5, 2022


The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the denial of a suspended attorney's second petition for reinstatement

The hearing committee properly considered Diviacchi's open contempt for the legal system and the disciplinary system, and particulary [sic] his baseless accusation, made publicly and maintained on the Internet, that his suspension was based on "bigotry," merely because a committee member was absent for part of the proceedings. Indeed, that contempt remains evident in his memorandum before this court.

In sum, the hearing committee's determination that Diviacchi lacks the moral qualifications required to practice law was well supported, and there has been no error of law or abuse of discretion in so determining.

Learning in the law

The board determined that, although Diviacchi has the "raw intellectual firepower to maintain his learning in the law," he had not done so. We agree. By the time of the hearing, Diviacchi had completed a course in practicing with professionalism, but he had undertaken no formal continuing legal education in any substantive legal subject.  It appears that he did engage in some informal efforts to learn about recent developments in the law, such as reviewing Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly and summarizing recent cases reported therein. As the hearing committee found, however, these efforts at most evinced a "superficial familiarity" with some recent decisions. Diviacchi's efforts were on a par with those deemed insufficient.

(Mike Frisch)

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink


Post a comment