Hello Students!
For Thursday’s class (Nov. 3), please read this Sussman v. Grado case about a paralegal who engaged in unethical conduct. Please write a short response to the case in a “reply” to this post. For example: what did you think of what the paralegal did, and/or the outcome? What surprised you about the case? What question(s) do you have about it? Anything at all! Please demonstrate through your response that you read and thought about the case. We’ll discuss it at the start of Thursday’s class!
I think the paralegal may have gotten confused with their role, all of those 13 years of work may have gotten to them. They seemed to try to do things correctly, however, they forgot that at the end of the day, they’re still just a paralegal and cannot practice law. On top of that, although they’re an independent paralegal, that assists people with documents, this specific paralegal prepared a form and they also started a turnover order, which they had no legal authority to do. The paralegal should have simply recommended that the client go to a lawyer to help them with their case and issue.
Overall, the way the entire case is written is somewhat difficult to understand.
Thanks Jacky! I agree this case (like most) was challenging to read. You did a great job figuring it out!
The paralegal made a mistake because she still completed the paperwork knowing she did not know what a “Turnover order” was, which Mr.Sussman was aware of. The plaintiff still proceeded to pay the fees for the services knowing there could be a possible consequence. They are both in the wrong. Ms.Grado should have professionally declined Mr.Sussmans ask. I personally feel like it could have been a resolved issue without having to sue.
Thanks Hadil! I agree, if both parties had acted more wisely, this incident probably could have been avoided.
Because the Paralegal worked individually for so many years without supervision, that might have made her confused on what she could and could not do. I believe since she had been so many years in the field she should have known better, it was unprofessional, and she should be punished by taking away her certificate if she has one or demand that she work under the supervision of a lawyer and can help people in a more professional way. She violated most of the things that a paralegal must not do which is filing legal documents and giving legal advice which caused the person to get affected by this
Thanks Nataly! Yes, it would be a good idea for this paralegal to only work under direct supervision of a lawyer in the future.
I thought the paralegal lacked competence. She took a case that she knew nothing about, didn’t do her research properly (lack of), and practiced law with no license. Part of paralegal ethical duties is to have competence in your work. She did not know what a turnover order was, however, she accepted the case. She did claim to do research (1) Allegedly” she asked 3 attorneys about the turnover order however they had never heard of the order (2) she called the sheriff’s office. The paralegals’ research was not enough because she had no knowledge of the order. The outcome of her malpractice was her client losing his case and owing the client $135.00 for her mistake.
I was very surprised at what the paralegal did, taking a case that she didn’t know anything about, which cost the client his case. I understand that the paralegal (defendant) tried to gather information to fill the turnover order. However just because she looked around doesn’t mean she got the answer, and this doesn’t give her the greenlight to take the case. She obviously should of turned down this case since she was unfamiliar with this order.
Thanks Katelyn! I agree, this was a big violation of the duty of competence (and several others).
After hearing that she has been a Paralegal for 13 years and is considered a certified paralegal, I am shocked that she did not know what was right or wrong in this situation. I think there was a fine line between just helping someone with legal troubles, and acting as an Attorney to help and assist the client. The paralegal did not even know what she was helping the client with and was pretty much guessing what the required document should include and look like. Not only did this affect her, but it also affected the plaintiff to where she was unable to receive the money from the 2 accounts. I think that this is the perfect example of what not to do as a paralegal/legal assistant and how easy it is to get into trouble when doing unauthorized practice of law.
Thanks Alex, I agree there is a fine line between what’s allowed and what’s not! In this case, when in doubt, don’t cross it. 🙂
You should know what to do and what not to do as a paralegal with 13 years of experience working in firms; breaking company legislation is your fault. You learn your roles at school, but you neglect them to fulfill your own purpose, therefore behaving like you already know everything will end badly for you. Because of your error, you put the customer in a tough situation. If you do not even grasp anything, ask for advice instead of assuming what the necessary documentation must have been. This section illustrates why one shouldn’t perform legal duties if one is not a lawyer.
Thanks Biana, yes this case is an excellent tale of caution!
As a certified paralegal with 13 years of experience she should have known what she can do and what she can’t. I think because of that experience and working with attorney’s the lines became blurred somewhere along the way which caused her crossing it. I’m not saying she’s right because she obviously didn’t know what she was doing and should’ve declined it the moment the client came to her. Even if she knew what an order was she had no right because she’s not a lawyer.
Thanks Maureen, yes she might have gotten overconfident. I hope she learned her lesson here!
From my perspective, the paralegal lacked efficiency and was incompetent with this case and the legal proceedings and authority a paralegal has. For someone who has been in this field for 13 years, you would think she would do her job properly for her clients as a paralegal, but she lacked her research skills and practiced law. Only an attorney can practice law after being approved by the Bar Association and passing the exams, which she did not have. I think she was confused herself, after working so many years independently without any supervision of an attorney, but she still completed the paperwork without knowing what a “Turnover Order” was, and as stated, “the clerk’s office properly rejected the papers.” She could’ve reached out for help, which she did, but should’ve waited until confirmation before submitting them to avoid losing the client’s case and remedies. Both parties made mistakes, but speaking to an attorney for legal advice would’ve been wiser since they can legally give directions in this jurisdiction if needed. 🙂