posted
The more I think about this, the worse it sounds. This lawyer either violated the confidence owed you as a prospective client or improperly failed to advise you to obtain counsel before questioning you on behalf of the clinic.
From what you've said so far (and you likely shouldn't say much more), he has committed at least one of several pretty serious ethical violations.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think I'll throw up now. I'm worried about a couple other related issues but can't describe them in any way. Meeting the lawyer at 2:30 today.
And I just got called by the police. They wanted me to donate to the spring fund drive. After my heart started beating again I said no.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If its any consolation, you didn't called by the police - odds are, you got called by one of the most obnoxious telemarketing programs I have ever had the misfortune to encounter.
(d) In dealing with an organization's directors, officers, employees, members, shareholders or other constituents, a lawyer shall explain the identity of the client when the lawyer believes that such explanation is necessary to avoid misunderstandings on their part.
quote:
Rule 4.1 Truthfulness in Statements to Others
In the course of representing a client, a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person.
Rule 4.2 Communication with Person Represented by Counsel
In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a party whom the lawyer knows to be represented in the matter by another lawyer, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized by law to do so.
Rule 4.3 Dealing with Unrepresented Person
In dealing on behalf of a client with a person who is not represented by counsel, a lawyer shall not state or imply that the lawyer is disinterested. When the lawyer knows or reasonably should know that the unrepresented person misunderstands the lawyer's role in the matter, the lawyer shall make reasonable efforts to correct the misunderstanding.
quote:Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: General rule
(a) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client will be directly adverse to another client, unless:
(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not adversely affect the relationship with the other client; and
(2) each client consents after consultation.
(b) A lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation of that client may be materially limited by the lawyer's responsibilities to another client or to a third person, or by the lawyer's own interests, unless:
(1) the lawyer reasonably believes the representation will not be adversely affected; and
(2) the client consents after consultation. When representation of multiple clients in a single matter is undertaken, the consultation shall include explanation of the implications of the common representation and the advantages and risks involved.
posted
The lawyer guy stopped using the "I" pronoun after the first day and indicated I would have representation when I asked about that. He said a couple times, when I asked directly, that it would "probably" not be him and he'd let me know after the meeting.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder if it would be helpful to find someone on your own, someone not connected to this first lawyer guy? I guess you'll get a sense of things after you meet with his recommendation lawyer today.
This weighes on me, Theca, and I grieve for you. This should have been a happy time. Perhaps this person's knowing you were going to be leaving soon made you a more attractive target.
Ah, jimminy cricket. And you take your work so seriously, too. Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're in my prayers today Theca especially as you meet your new laywer. I hope that this lawyer can help you feel better and have some peace of mind.
Posts: 6415 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:He said a couple times, when I asked directly, that it would "probably" not be him and he'd let me know after the meeting.
Sounds to me like he was stringing you along, to get info from you while you were w/out counsel. I doubt if he really planned to represent you, at least after the HIPPAA allegations came up.
I agree with Dag and Beren--sounds fishy to me. Tell your lawyer.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is the first thing I noticed...and I am not even involved in Law School, or anything....I was hoping I had just misunderstood you.
I would tell your lawyer, and make sure he knows what you are saying...that you asked for council and was told that he would only give it to you if you cooperated with their questions. I would also go with another lawyer, other than the one recommended to you, because you might want/need to go after the first lawyer for unethical misconduct, and if they know each other your lawyer might not be willing to accommodate your desires with regard to that.
Sounds like a very fishy trick, and if ti is ruled unethical then any information they gained from that might not be admissible in court. That is very, very important, and something you should discuss with your lawyer ASAP, in my non-lawyerly opinion.
posted
I just gave my new lawyer $8000 and she seems very nice. And trustworthy. And she lives like two hours away from here and has nothing in common with my lawyer except that he recommended her. She doesn't really know him, though. So far she and the other lawyer have planned to work together, her on criminal stuff, him on HIPPAA stuff, but she'll be watching for problems with that arrangement and so she'll be checking closely this week on him as she catches up with him and researches this further.
My parents are here now, I'll be posting only intermittently for awhile. I don't expect anything else to happen until Tuesday after I've moved to my new city. What I mean is, I won't know anything new till Tuesday, most likely, while she is catching up on this.
Thanks for all the help and good wishes.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, on Friday I got a registered letter from my former clinic. It was a copy of the letter they sent the patient, stating clearly that they did NOT feel I violated HIPAA in any way and stating their reasons. The points they made were excellent and it should be clear to her that the problems she is accusing me of started a full two years before I even moved there! Hopefully that will end the HIPAA problem. I emailed my lawyer a copy of the letter. She still needs to talk with the prosecutor's office, that part of the case is still ongoing.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good Luck. Hopefully the fact that this person's problems started two years before you were at the clinic where her records were kept will go a long way towards proving that you didn't have means or opportunity to commit the fraud that you are accused of committing. Without means or opportunity I would think that it should be very difficult, if not impossible, for them to make a case. (Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, though I do love a good John Grisham Novel. )
You said that part of that was ongoing...does that mean that the other part is on hold now, or has been dropped?
Once again, don't answer that if it could cause problems, although I don't know how it could....I am just hoping that it has been good news for you as well.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, the HIPAA part should be over unless the patient is still wanting to push the matter. I assume she could appeal to someone higher up outside the clinic to review the HIPAA thing, but I don't really know how this HIPAA review stuff works. I am very relieved the HIPAA thing is over before I had to tell my new clinic about it and possibly lose my new job that starts next week. The criminal case is still at the prosecutor's office until they become convinced they should drop the case, that is what I am waiting on. I think.
Part of why I liked the letter so much is because it told me information about the case that makes it even less likely anyone would really want to pursue this in court. The sheriff had told me that some of the bills with my name on them were from Jan 2004. Apparently that is NOT true, the bills are from 2001 and 2002. I moved there in 2003.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know this is not helpful, but... what a dipsh&% that sheriff is. *snort* He should be thrown out of office.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The HIPAA violation may still be in effect for the clinic, but since this happened a full two years before you even started, you can't be held directly responsible for the HIPAA violations.
quote: The sheriff had told me that some of the bills with my name on them were from Jan 2004. Apparently that is NOT true, the bills are from 2001 and 2002. I moved there in 2003.
Isn't that prime? If you lie to them, it's giving false information to a peace officer. If they lie to you, it's just getting information.
Hypocritical.
I'm glad you were able to resolve this though. Posts: 496 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, the lawyer just told me today that the criminal investigation could still take weeks. The prosecutor's office wants to do a thorough investigation before dropping it. So she told me to just not worry too much about it, and to be patient.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is it still going to cost you $8,000? I think it sucks that you have to spend your own money when you're innocent. I think there should be some type of law for stuff like this. If you are accused of something and need an attorney and it turns out that you were innocent (not just "not guilty", but someone actually lied about something) you should have your expenses paid by some sort of fund that those who accuse people of falsely have to pay into for the rest of their lives.
But it sounds like things are improving. The waiting sucks though, doesn't it?
Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Good news! The case appears to be over. The prosecutor has decided to deny the warrent request. According to my lawyer that means for me the case is over unless some new evidence against me shows up. Since that won't be happening, it should be over. Looks like out of my $8000 retainer fee I might get close to $6000 back. The case should cost me about $2000 total I'd guess.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I still don't know exactly what exactly happened to the woman in Michigan, but here's what I've gathered so far. This is just a summary for those who wanted to hear the story:
Apparently the phone number I had in a small town near South Bend, IN, once upon a time before I lived there belonged to another person I'll call Kim A. Smith. In 2001 and 2002 she had 3 different phone companies in turn and had bills of approximately $150 on each of them. The address on file for her was not my address but is a real address on Main St. I picked up the telephone number in March 2003 when I moved there. Apparently the earlier unpaid bills for Kim Smith were being sent to Main St and finally got turned over to two different collection agencies. Somehow during some time between 2001 and now, the SSN of a different Kim A. Smith in Michigan got attached to the bills. One of these phone companies doesn't even service her area in Michigan. My name somehow got on these collection bills as well. When this second Kim tried to get a mortgage she was told she had bad credit. When she researched, the collection companies were happy to hear from her and sent the bills to her. The bills had my phone number (of course!) and somehow my name was on them too, plus her name and her SSN and some address on Main St. She immediately took it to the sheriff and he picked up the phone and called the number at 7:30 the next morning. He reached me, of course, and that is how I got involved. I was supposed to meet him to show him my SS card but by the time I got there he knew I was a doctor in the clinic she goes to and decided I was guilty, well, that he was 98% sure he had enough evidence to take me to trial for it. He told me I should run home and "bust my butt" to prove my innocence. Within a couple hours I had determined that my credit was just fine and all three phone companies appeared mystified that I had any involvement. Getting written proof of this was going to be much more difficult and I couldn't get it done myself without help. Two of the companies confirmed for me that I hadn't even used them in the past several years, at least. I also looked up Kim's name at the clinic to see if she was a patient of mine. I was not listed as ever having seen her.
The next morning Kim went to my clinic and kicked up a huge fuss. She told her doctor and his staff and office manager that I had stolen her identity and was in custody and what were they gonna do about it. Furthermore she accused me of hipaa violations in getting her SSN AND in looking up her record the previous day to see if she was my patient. Luckily I had called the CEO the previous night so they had a heads up. I spent hours talking to the CEO, the designated hipaa person, and the clinic lawyer. Then they sent me out to do it all over again with a Michigan lawyer of my own while they researched the Hipaa violations. My biggest fear was that my looking to see if she was a patient would be a true violation that could hurt my career. They cleared me of that within three weeks and then it took my lawyer three more weeks to convince the prosecutor to drop the warrant for identity theft.
At this point the second Kim is probably still fighting her bad credit. I don't know what she will do but she's cost me $2000 and a lot of stress so I don't care that much right now. I personally think the collection companies collected a lot of bad data and put 2 and 2 together and got 10. My lawyer just thinks the phone companies made some mistakes. It is also possible there never was a first Kim and that someone stole the second Kim's identity back in 2001 when the telephone account was set up.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's super news, Theca! And you get most of your retainer back too. I'm very happy it worked out! Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
Too bad you had to be involved at all, but at least it is resolved for the most part.
Still, even though you don't feel too bad about this lady, and I understand way, I do. Someone screwed her pretty hard...providing she wasn't the one who did it in the first place.
My sister-in-law had this happen, only with a felony count conviction. She went to get a CORI report so she could get a job in social services after her graduation, and was told that she was currently serving a 3 year sentence in a federal prison fro fraud. Turns out someone she knew a long time ago had stolen her identity, and she never knew it...then she got busted for fraud and told them he was my sister-in-law! She was in the second year of her sentence, almost up for parole, when this broke.
My SIL had all sorts of problems getting it cleared up, though...even though none of the fingerprints matched, and she had all sorts of documentation. It took a State Congresswoman and Ted Kennedy, from the US Senate, to fix it. Judges kept saying "It was a legally rendered verdict" and passing it on.
So count yourself lucky, even though it may not seem like you have been overall.
posted
Yeah, I'm thrilled it's over, and relieved that my reputation and credit are intact. $2000 is a small price to pay for all of that and I realize that. And I get $6000 back!
I DO feel sorry for Kim. I'm just too happy to feel as concerned for her as I usually would. I wonder if she still thinks I've gotten away with something or if she realizes I'm just a victim too.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the collection agencies were negligent in putting your name where it didn't belong, and are the cause of this whole mess, then I think they should pay for your bills, or at least suffer some consequence for having mistakenly pointed the finger at you.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It would cost more money to research this enough to figure out where the trouble started and the lawyer doesn't really recommend it. I was told by a law student from Texas that it isn't legal to give clients phone numbers that are "encumbered" that is, have bill still attached to them. In addition my phone number was only disconnected less than 2 months when I was given it which seems awfully short. I'd love to make the phone company pay since I wouldn't have had any trouble if they hadn't given me an encumbered number but I don't think I'll bother. Does anyone know if this is in fact illegal?
I did learn a lot of things from the this experience. Some valuable things I wanted to point out for Hatrackers:
Keeping old records is a good idea. I had 5+ years of phone bill reciepts that my lawyer was very happy to take off my hands. Not necessary, no, but helpful in showing I've been paying all my bills monthly. Furthermore, I was able to produce my old leases for the past several years which helped prove to the prosecutor where I was living in 2001 and 2002. Again, not necessary, but far easier to just spend two minutes looking for it in my file instead of two weeks getting the proof from the apartment complexes involved.
Also, never put things off till last minute. I was way ahead on my packing and phone calls and so on involved in my upcoming move. Even spending hours daily on the case, and despite being too stressed to pack for the first 48 hours of the case, I was still able to move on time within a week of my sheriff visit without any problems.
And I've learned to keep a close eye on my credit reports. Not that that would have helped this time, but still. Worth checking up on.
And thanks for all the help, Hatrack. The support and prayers have been very appreciated.
Posts: 1990 | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Because I've been on so sporadically, I missed this.
Wow, I'm so glad things worked out for you, except for the fee. I understand how you feel about Kim. One feels bad for her, but is irritated that she made such a big scene of it, I suppose. Anyway, she'll get it cleared up and things will work out for her too.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ack, I think we do have records hanging around here somewhere, but it wouldn't take us a few minutes to find it. I'm never that well organized. Glad on your behalf that you are.
Posts: 3495 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm really glad this worked out for you, Theca, and glad that the money involved is not a big finantial blow to you. Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am so glad to hear that this fiasco is winding down for you. I can imagine the relief you must be feeling.
Posts: 2022 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm glad this worked out for you. And I would feel sorry for Kim except for this: "The next morning Kim went to my clinic and kicked up a huge fuss. She told her doctor and his staff and office manager that I had stolen her identity and was in custody and what were they gonna do about it." She intentionally made trouble for you with no proof. And she lied about it. My sympathy ends there.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Congrats on a (mostly) successful resolution.
I feel sorry for "Kim" for having to go through this, but her behavior at the clinic was uncalled for. It would certainly be nice if someone were to pay your legal fees for you since you definitely weren't involved, but good luck getting anyone to accept responsibility on their own. At least it ONLY cost you 2K instead of 8 or more.
Posts: 4515 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
