Prominent law firm, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP, is one such entity under scrutiny following allegations of engaging in questionable practices. Los Angeles City Councilman Current Price has recently been charged in connection to a pay-to-play scheme after having a financial interest in projects he voted on, according to the district attorney's office. Price is not the only person accused of such behaviour in recent months. Exclusive New York City prep school Horace Mann is also accused of a pay-to-play scheme in which it allowed a wealthy businessman to buy his children's admission for $1 million. And New York Governor Kathy Hochul is also accused of alleged involvement in such a scheme. Pay-to-play schemes refer to the practice of exchanging political or business favours for financial contributions or benefits to influence decision makers and engaging in this type of activity is often illegal.
Such schemes do not reside solely in the political or education domains but extend to the legal realm as well. A prominent law firm, Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP (BLB&G), is under scrutiny following allegations of violating ethical rules through a "pay-to-play" scheme. A recently released and widely circulated grievance committee complaint about BLB&G implicates BLB&G has breached Model Rule 7.6 of the American Bar Association and Rules 5.1 and 7.2 of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct.
Model Rule 7.6 of the American Bar Association prohibits lawyers or law firms from accepting government legal engagements or appointments if they make political contributions or solicit such contributions to obtain or be considered for those positions. Similarly, Rule 7.2 of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct forbids lawyers from compensating or providing anything of value to individuals or organizations in exchange for recommending or obtaining employment by a client.
The evidence shown in the complaint letter reveals that BLB&G, including several senior partners such as former managing partner Douglas McKeige and current senior partner Tony Gelderman, engaged in a multi-year "pay-to-play" campaign involving political donations. According to the evidence, these contributions appear to have been made to curry favour with government decision-makers, particularly elected officials responsible for awarding legal engagements or appointments related to representing public pension funds in shareholder suits.
Furthermore, the evidence suggests that BLB&G's donations were made or influenced to secure and maintain their representation of public pension funds in shareholder suits. The complaint revealed that the donations were not in line with the normal activism of a committed political activist but were, instead, part of a broader scheme to obtain favourable treatment from elected officials in exchange for lucrative business relationships.
The evidence further suggests that BLB&G's actions contravene ethical rules designed to prevent conflicts of interest and maintain the integrity of the legal profession and government. By engaging in these questionable contributions to elected officials whose agencies BLB&G sought to represent, the law firm may have compromised the impartiality and fairness of the legal system.
The anonymous complaint outlines specific instances of unlawful donations by BLB&G to public officials, such as the former Attorney General of Mississippi, Mr. Hood, and former Louisiana Treasurer, Senator John Kennedy. These donations coincided closely with BLB&G's engagement by the states in representing their public pension funds in class-action lawsuits, raising suspicions of a connection between the contributions and the selection process.
This complaint provides new evidence that was previously unavailable, which could not be considered in prior court rulings on pay-to-play misconduct allegations involving BLB&G. The former Executive Director and Chief Investment Officer of the Louisiana State Employee Retirement System, Mr. Robert Borden, acknowledged the ethical implications and stated that any benefits received from a law firm should require disclosure and abstention from voting on their hiring.
The Grievance Committee will now investigate the allegations and assess whether BLB&G violated ethical rules as outlined by the complainant. If found guilty, the law firm could face disciplinary actions, potentially affecting their reputation and standing in the legal community.
BLB&G has yet to issue a public response to these allegations, and it remains to be seen how they will address the evidence presented to the Grievance Committee.
As long as companies, organizations, law firms, and individuals continue to employ pay-to-play schemes, integrity and trustworthiness will remain elusive. It is crucial to stem this phenomenon as much as possible. Otherwise, the very foundations of trust are at risk.
