Eric Deters is a lawyer in Northern Kentucky whose bulldog style has gotten him in the news again, this time for being fined $14,000 by a trial judge.
Deters is known for his very aggressive approach to cases, an approach which has not won him many friends among lawyers, the Bar Association or even with judges. However, his style seems to suit most of his clients just fine.
I've known Eric for decades and have watched him work. What really upsets most of his colleagues has little to do with his legal abilities or his loyalty to his clients. What really upsets most lawyers is that he refuses to conform to their notion of what a lawyer should act like.
No doubt lawyers need to be as certain as possible that the suits they file are meritorious, but in the history of the law it has often been the innovative approach taken by bold lawyers which has resulted in the kind of changes in the definition of justice which are only later celebrated.
I also know judge McGinnis who levied the fine. In fact, I had my first case with him when we were both young lawyers. He is a no nonsense guy with terrific instincts and I'm certain that he evaluated the facts and law very carefully before making his ruling.
And I know Judge Bates of Grant County, the subject of much of Erics criticism. Judge Bates and I ran for the same open seat and he won. Since then I've had many cases in his court and though we do not always agree on everything, I have been very supportive of his tough stand on many issues and our relationship has been polite and professional.
The point of this post is not to defend Eric, or criticize his punishment or to suggest that the judges he has critcized can never be wrong. The point is simply this: As the public stands witness to what seems to be one controversy after another involving lawyers it needs to be repeated for the sake of liberty and justice, that lawyers have a sworn duty to defend the constitution and to vigorously represent their clients. This will often put them on the oppositie side of public sentitment, the opposite side of courthouse politics and sometimes even on the opposite side of their colleagues at the bar. But these things should not work to chill their advocacy, their free speech or their spirit.
If that ever happens there would be no one left to stand up for any of us when the time came. The American style of justice was born out of revolution and there needs to be a bit of the rebellious spirit in our lawyers for the future of American justice to survive.
Marcus, no need to withhold names here. This poster has posted her story time and time again on many blogs, and I think she even has her own blog.
Posted by: | January 01, 2009 at 12:37 AM
Oh, my god Marcus, we unconditionally agree on a topic so controversial that the subject is never broached around me and anyone else having attended law school. Especially around my UVa Law-educated sister.
I even supported Dan White's 'Twinkie Defense', the Nazis in Skokie and the KKK in Joliet. It's the one thing I really enjoy about the ACLU - aggressive representation with only the relationship with the client at issue.
Happy New Year.
.
Posted by: BimBeau | January 01, 2009 at 12:37 AM
The truth is that the Kentucky judicial system is in systemic failure.
I am a pro se litigant with a J.D. No, I haven't failed the bar because I haven't even applied for it yet. The reason for this delay is due to judicial misconduct in a custody matter in BLANK County. My ex husband is attorney NAME WITHHELD.
The current judge NAME WITHHELD appears to be honorable. But he refuses to address the prior judicial misconduct of a former judge who conducted sham legal proceedings in 2002 with my case, and in 2006 convicted me of domestic violence because I marched in public with a sign.- NO JOKE.
In fact, the DVO conviction was enacted solely to illegally change full custody to my ex husband so he would not have to pay child support, not turn over his tax returns, and protect the BLANK County Attorney who refused to prosecute BLANK for nine months.
I have been under supervised visitation for two and half years now, with no factual finding to support it. AND, I have asked repeatedly for the Courts to at least tell me why I can't have a normal relationship with my two children now ages 9 and 14.
I have filed complaints with the Judicial Conduct Commission. This was after I sued BLANK in federal court and state courts for injunctive relief.
The Judicial Conduct Commission voted to refuse to accept my valid complaint against BLANK. This happened at the MONTH YEAR meeting.
My two cents is that BLANK is caught between a rock and hard place. He wants to uphold the integrity of the courts, but his boss knew all about the sham legal proceedings and prior judicial misconduct and the legal system itself prevents him from doing so.
As this ties into the article; attorneys and judges who step "out of line" are punished. Judges and attorneys are expected to look the other way when legal misconduct takes place. My suspicion is that the attorney that was punished had the audacity to step "out of line" and do the right and ethical thing for his client, without regards to the system.
(PUBLISHER"S NOTE: Due to the nature of the allegations in this comment various identifying information has been masked in order to convey the story without naming names. The comment author has likewise been masked.)
Posted by: NAME MASKED | December 30, 2008 at 02:29 PM