in search of attorney in the Killeen or Austin

It has to be the "tears" like crying, not like ripping, and here's why.

You know why lawyers never get hemorrhoids? Because they're perfect assholes.

(And I did cry at least three tears in law school, but I never admit it in public while using my real name.)

While many of us at the Bar (the legal bar, not the titty bar) remember the astonishing result of the vote the estimable ShysterJon referenced, I have had a conversation with one guy who said his former client filed a grievance against him that included a complaint that he "used" her for sex during the course of the representation. The grievance committee didn't necessarily cite him for breaking the non-existing "no nooky" rule, but to my friend it was a huge factor in them being extra zealous in finding other violations of various provisions of the DRPC (colloquially, the "ethics rules"), and in assessing a severe penalty that he was pretty sure would have been no more than a private reprimand under less sexy circumstances.

And no, I WILL NOT provide this lawyer's name to you if you pm me, so save the key strokes. And I don't care who you are.

So my thought -- yes, it's true that in Texas at least, it's not a direct violation of the DRPC to have sex with a client. If you do it as a "trade for services" however, it is a violation of Rule 1.04 ("A lawyer shall not enter into an arrangement for, charte, or collect an illegal fee or unconscionable fee.") It also will probably be alleged to be a violation of Rule 8.04(a)(2) ("A lawyer shall not ... commit a ... criminal act [prostitution or solicitation of prostitution] that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects ..."). So, if you hire a lawyer who is willing to trade for sexual services as the original poster asks, you're not hiring a very good, a very smart, or very careful lawyer, and you should keep shopping.

I agree with Stag's analysis, and I would add that in the event a lawyer is grieved by a client who traded sex for services, the Bar very well might formulate some kind of conflict of interest charge against the lawyer as well.

Agreed. And as I said, I think the vote reflects that there are adequate existing avenues to protect clients from unscrupulous attorneys.

I think the gut reaction is to think of the a person is a highly vulnerable situation (criminal charges, divorce, family violence, or even personal injury or probate) being taken advantage of by a sleazy lawyer. I get it. It's wrong and embarrassing for ALL attorneys.

That said, does anyone really care if I am filing a patent app for someone and we happened to fall into bed with each other? Or if I'm outside counsel for Exxon and I sleep with some random Exxon employee? I know I don't care...

Trees has long maintained (and taken a lot of shit for it) that the quality of the TX bar, particularly those practicing in the criminal area are the lowest (pun intended) in the nation. Not unfair to say that many of them sell their clients up the river as a matter of due course, are in bed (literally and figuratively) with the prosecutors and the State and are well known to use the least amount of effort, energy and creativity in the way they discharge their "duties" on behalf of criminal defendants.

There are reasons why TX has the highest conviction and incarceration stats in the entire USA: quality of defense counsel has a lot to do with it.

So Trees gonna go out on limb here and swim against the advice and suggest that maybe giving regular 'service" to your attorney might give you an edge that most client's lack.

The hardest part will be finding a willing attorney. Most will want the money AND want to fuck you too.

Sad but true. Good luck.

19Trees