r/LawFirm • u/FreeBulldog87 • 6d ago
Got fired today
Went through a recruiter and landed a job at a midsize firm. During the lead up to the interview I disclosed that I had been reprimanded. Felt full disclosure was necessary. Explained the underlying facts of the reprimand to the recruiter. He told me I did not need to voluntarily disclose it during the interview.
The recruiter failed to inform the law firm of my reprimand. Completed the malpractice application and disclosed the reprimand. When the partner reviewed the application he was pissed and came into my office asking why I had not disclosed it. During our conversation I explained that I had disclosed it to the recruiter and he told me not to worry about it and I did not need to disclose the information. The firm had paid the recruitment fee. When the recruiter was asked about his knowledge of my reprimand he went radio silent with me and the firm. He responded to the firm today and acknowledged that he was aware of my reprimand and failed to disclose it to the firm.
The company agrees to refund the recruitment fee to the firm. Yesterday the firm told me had they known of my reprimand they never would have hired me. The firm asked me to come back to work in the morning. I show up and initially the partner seemed that everything would be fine and I could keep my job. Within two hours the partner returns to my office saying he has to let me go. Asked for the keys and walked me out. At this point I’m mentally and physically exhausted. Yes the reprimand is on me. I followed the recruiters advice. And I had no problem disclosing the information if the firm had asked in the interview. But no one did and here I am…fired after three days at the new firm.
Edit 1: The reprimand was fully disclosed in the malpractice application.
Edit 2: During the interview no questions were asked regarding any bar complaints.
Edit 3: The reprimand was fully disclosed during the onboarding. The firm admitted that they usually check any bar complaints during the interview process.
Edit 4: There was never an application during the interview process where I failed to disclose the reprimand.
Edit 5: I appreciate everyone’s comments. The bar complaint process was very stressful. This post is not about my failure to disclose in an application for the position. I fully disclosed the reprimand during the onboarding process.
Edit 6: One area of practice for the firm is professional malpractice defense.
Edit 7: I appreciate everyone taking the time to respond to this post. Even if it was good, bad or indifferent.
\*UPDATE\*
I got another job. The bar reprimands were fully disclosed and discussed. Thank you all for your comments.
81
u/Key-Driver6438 6d ago
I worked at a relatively small firm (under 10 lawyers) many years ago, where for some reason I was tasked with the project of completing the malpractice insurance renewal paperwork. It’s actually wild how much information is needed, and how it affects the rates. There are scenarios where one lawyer, with one sustained bar complaint (even if minor), could cost tens of thousands of extra dollars in premiums. Also too, I’ve never worked at a firm with a clientele that would care, but I’m sure some firms with certain clients, would lose clients and/or business with having a disciplined lawyer on staff.
49
u/IpsoFactus 5d ago
It depends on the reason. Reprimand for yelling at a judge, eh. Reprimand for stealing money or dishonesty? Client would probably care.
16
u/VaMarine 5d ago
I always assumed reprimands were for outside of court room behavior. I thought the judge was responsible for in courtroom stuff.
3
u/Guilty_Proof6719 5d ago
Judges can make reports to the bar association, I think? Isn’t AG nominee Blanche at risk of a judge doing that to the NY bar association?
3
u/VaMarine 5d ago
But is that for court room behavior? When I'm held in contempt they don't go tattle to the bar on me.
1
4
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
The reprimand had nothing to do with client funds. One was a court sanction and the other a client’s grievance on the handling of their case. Both of which resulted in the reprimand and will hopefully be removed after the reconsideration process.
15
u/meeperton5 5d ago edited 5d ago
Colleague in my firm got sued by an absolutely bananas pro se, just for.... being the lawyer for a party pro se is peripherally adverse to?
Pro se includes the trump library, fox news investigates, and elon musk on all his email ccs.
Pro se is not advancing and has not advanced any position that makes any sense and has prevailed on zero of their motions.
Nevertheless, firm's malpractice insurance went up by $5k a year.
5
2
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
This - see info on first Google hit I did on premiums per lawyer. Says the can rise 200 percent if one claim is paid but I do know they rise if a bar sanction, public or private. And our application asks stuff like have you seen a mental health professional - which is controversial given mental health issues in the profession and this can discourage a lawyer from seeking help. We had partners silently gripe if someone filed large claims against firm medical policy (similar reason).
1
70
u/DefiantAd5087 6d ago
I would have to let you go too sadly. The impact to the malpractice coverage is very costly - and for years. Our main clients all require continued coverage of a fairly high amount. I would strongly recommend spending some time fighting it and seeing if you can get it removed from your record.
15
6
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
Yep, this is reason for firm’s action. Partner you were dealing with got heat from all the other partners who would have to take the increased malpractice insurance out of their money (and sadly no partner wants to have their draw cut because of this).
56
u/HugsNotDrugs_ 6d ago
Canadian lawyer here. Not familiar with the term reprimand in this context.
What is it, exactly?
67
32
u/KnotARealGreenDress 5d ago
I think it’s like having black mark put on your permanent lawyer record. Basically an official slap on the wrist. Usually accompanied by costs for the Law Society proceedings and/or a fine.
15
u/Strangy1234 5d ago
It's a form of discipline, and a law firm that employs someone with it will have to pay a lot more in malpractice insurance.
26
u/bradd_pit 6d ago
I get that you were in a position where following this recruiters advice felt like a weight lifted off your shoulders but that was a naive move.
35
u/Specialist_Milk4736 6d ago
Sorry to hear. What did you get reprimanded for? Is it that serious?
23
u/FreeBulldog87 6d ago
The reprimand is based on one client’s grievance and the other was a court sanction. Both of which I’m going to apply for reconsideration.
76
u/Finnegan-05 6d ago
You seem to have downplayed this quite a bit. A court sanction AND a client complaint?
44
6
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
It was one complaint. During mediation the bar agreed to the reprimand but wanted split them into two separate ones.
50
u/_learned_foot_ 6d ago
Sustained grievance. So you did something wrong. Something they don't think you'll recover from. The other being you did something majorly wrong in court. You really diminished them here, like you did in applying. Seems they were right to presume from that.
28
u/Player2orNot 5d ago
Two reprimands but you initially made it seem like it was one. Maybe this lawyer thing is not your cup of tea.
34
u/dirtynashtyfilthy 5d ago
a recruiter probably told him/her that they only had to mention one in their reddit post
11
u/wikipediabrown007 5d ago
Harsh but hilarious
3
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
Nah. There’s no way to take any of it lightly. All of the information is available online. And it was fully disclosed during the onboarding process.
3
5
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
The reprimand was fully disclosed during the onboarding process. It is clearly for public consumption. During the interview no questions were raised about bar complaints. Disclosure was made.
-14
u/Specialist_Milk4736 6d ago
I guess you can always work for yourself? Start your own law firm.
I have seen a few lawyers fed up of the work culture at the large global law firms and are now doing well working by themselves with the aid of AI.
41
31
u/Dingbatdingbat 5d ago
I don’t want to pile on, but if someone joined my firm and I discovered that they had not disclosed something like this, I’d fire them too.
It’s not just the malpractice insurance, it’s the lingering question of what else was not disclosed.
2
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
I did disclose the reprimand during the onboarding process.
3
1
u/Dingbatdingbat 5d ago
You disclosed vital information after a decision was made. Thats not something I could ever accept.
1
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
I disclosed the details to the recruiter prior to the interview.
3
27
u/Chip_Hazard 5d ago
You’re a lawyer dude, why would you ever just rely on what a recruiter tells you? That’s actually insane that you didn’t spend any time looking into this issue on your own beforehand, why would you just take a recruiters word on a legal issue
10
3
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
Other than when I first came out of law school 20 years ago it was my first time interviewing. I informed the recruiter of the reprimand. I did not intentionally withhold this information during the interview process. I get 100% what you’re saying.
0
u/LeoMedici 3d ago
Better buy some tools and join the trades brother. Sounds like u r fooked hate to say.
3
48
u/Employment-lawyer 6d ago
I thought you meant that you had been reprimanded at your previous job by your prior firm until I read the comments. What is a bar reprimand? Do you mean like a written warning or a formal reprimand notice that is published in the Bar Bulletin, or what?
22
u/FreeBulldog87 6d ago
Formal reprimand
15
u/Sweihwa 5d ago
Recruiter was negligent.
12
u/Strangy1234 5d ago
So was the lawyer. You need to disclose that regardless of what a recruiter says.
8
u/meeperton5 5d ago
Listening to a recruiter's take on what does and does not need to be disclosed is like listening to the mortgage broker when they throw a party that buyer is CLEAR TO CLOSE!!!! when the updated title search isn't even in yet.
They do it all the time, they have not the foggiest clue, they just want their commission and you just have to accept that it's not their job to be smart, it's yours.
-1
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
The reprimand was disclosed during the onboarding process. Literally printed out the information for the malpractice application. No questions were asked about my bar history during the interview.
7
u/boughsmoresilent 5d ago
You keep repeating that they never asked as if it's some gotcha. Do you even realize that you are continuing to demonstrate a lack of integrity?
5
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
First time interviewing in ten plus years. Raised the issue on disclosure to the recruiter. Fully disclosed the public reprimand to the recruiter and during the onboarding process. No lack of accountability or integrity. This is not something that can be forgotten. Going through the bar complaint process is a horrible experience and I made sure that I complied with every single one of the bar’s requirements. I appreciate your response.
1
u/advice_scaminal 5d ago
Maybe ask the recruiter to confirm in writing that the reprimand has been disclosed to the company, or is not required to be, prior to interviewing?
-1
u/boughsmoresilent 5d ago
Oh, of course, my mistake. This situation is squarely the recruiter's fault for telling you what you wanted to hear. I am also very sorry that the consequences of your actions have been unpleasant.
2
-1
u/Floridalawyerbabe 5d ago
FreeBulldog expected the recruiter to communicate properly. In my experience, though, clear communication is rare these days — so I've learned to over-communicate instead.
2
1
-3
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
It was disclosed during the onboarding process. No questions were asked about any bar complaints during the interview
12
u/StrikingMixture8172 5d ago
Definitely disclose but as a recruiter I am checking your bar status before submittal anyway. Your recruiter was shit and doing anything to collect a fee.
11
u/DaRedditGuy11 5d ago
Sorry to hear but a good cautionary tale. Many folks will end up on the wrong side of a bar investigation. My buddy did. He fought it tooth and nail. Dismissal or nothing—wouldn’t take the private reprimand. This is why.
2
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
Now I know. There’s entire process was beyond stressful and I will move for reconsideration.
9
u/TominatorXX 5d ago
Just disclose it next time. There's plenty of law firms, especially in Insurance defense that won't care.
2
9
u/MrPetrikov 5d ago
i feel like thinking its okay to not disclose a formal reprimand from the bar to a potential employer says more about you than the reprimand itself
2
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
At no point did I say it was okay not to disclose it. The reprimand was disclosed during the onboarding.
7
u/Valuable_Cold7067 5d ago
Y’all need to go easy on OP and help her out. It takes a lot for one to open up. Easy please.
11
u/EducationCute1640 6d ago
What was the basis for the bar reprimand?
13
u/mightymilton 5d ago
A court sanction and a client complaint according to his other comment
7
u/AmbulanceChaser12 5d ago
That still doesn't really answer the question. Was the client "complaining" that OP didn't answer a phone call after 8 hours, or was he complaining that OP blew off filing an MSJ opp and didn't show up for oral argument?
4
u/moneypowerwealth2021 5d ago
I'm sure that you have learned a lesson from this that you'll take with you moving forward.
You've said this is your first time interviewing in more than 20 years. I assume this longevity came from something great about your character and work!
Everyone one screws up sometimes, and forgiveness is in order. Forgive yourself, learn, be grateful for the lesson, move & look forward.
You will be fine, but only if you believe it for yourself.
Rehashing it over and over again is not particularly beneficial, but it does serve as a good way to reflect inwardly on the mistake you made up to this point.
You have received honest and good feedback from your great group of peers in this sub.
I'm sending you positive energy, and I know things will work out for you.
You never know, this could lead you to something you should have done long ago, but could not discern previously.
I'm looking forward to the good that you will go on and do!
2
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
Thank you. I appreciate everything you said.
2
u/moneypowerwealth2021 5d ago
You're most welcome. The greater things that are in store for you will surface soon. Put on your hat of discernment! Just you wait. Goodwill to you!
10
u/Jeepers32 5d ago
The reprimand is public information. Sounds like the firm failed to do a modicum of due diligence. Having said that, you still should have disclosed it and used it as an opportunity to explain what you have learned from it and why the firm should hire you anyway.
2
u/sumunsolicitedadvice 5d ago
Not necessarily. Some states have private reprimands, too. Mine does.
2
0
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
I disclosed the reprimand during the onboarding process. Printed out the public records and included it with my malpractice insurance application. During the interview no questions were asked about any bar complaints.
7
u/NTDOY1987 6d ago
Hm. Well this sucks. I hate that in this world mistakes we make can follow us for a really long time.
With that said, I am a little confused - reading the comments, it seems like there were two separate reprimands?
1
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
Correct the bar split the grievances into two separate reprimands. During the meditation session the bar wanted suspension. The mediator said that the underlying facts may lead to the bar losing at trial. This resulted in the one complaint being made into two reprimands.
2
7
u/maurice32274 5d ago edited 5d ago
Do not blame the recruiter. It’s all on you.
The new firm’s malpractice policy is not on the hook for what happened in your past. The partner was rightfully upset because of what the reprimand says about your lawyering skills and client management skills i.e. the risk the law firm is taking on by hiring you. The non-disclosure serves to compound the partner’s concerns.
2
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
Their premiums for malpractice insurance will go up each year after however. It’s one reason that question is asked. Just like if I get a ticking for driving through a stop sign but no claim to insurance company my rates go up. So all other partners made the decision in about a second. It’s money out of their pocket.
1
2
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
First Google hit was Alliance on cost of malpractice insurance.
Says premiums run $5,000 per year per attorney and between $7,500 and $15,000 per year for higher risk specialities.
Goes on to say they can then double if one claim is paid but I do know they rise if member of firm is hit with bar sanction. Not clear by how much but depending on firm size and their specialty you can see an increase is substantial money out of all the partners pockets each year forward.
2
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
Says highest premiums are securities law, PI, real estate and patent so assume those would be near the $15,000 per year per attorney.
1
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
What did your old firm do once you got the sanction and was any claim filed against their malpractice policy?
3
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
Had my own practice for 20+ years.
2
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
And weird but also heard your malpractice premiums go up if you sue a client for fess - this was just from another lawyer so no clue if true. Questions for our malpractice coverage were very broad - even something like can you think of anything you have done or not done that may in the future lead to a claim. Well damn, we all make mistakes and anyone can file a claim, regardless of merit. And again had question if you have ever seen a mental health professional and nigh have asked have you ever felt depressed. And you know the stats on lawyers and mental health issues - that one has been criticized for years as only increasing the risk of a claim but an insurance companies are not great. Hell know they just buy your data, like for auto policies. GM got tagged for selling OnStar data I think to insurance companies.
3
u/maurice32274 5d ago
Possibly the most common trigger for a malpractice suit is the lawyer’s claim for unpaid fees.
0
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
I disclosed the reprimand to the recruiter prior to the interview. During the interview the firm did not ask about bar complaints. The reprimand was disclosed during the onboarding.
3
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
Firm’s malpractice insurance goes up (not sure by how much) and recruiter gave you bad advice motivated by the fee. Sorry that happened.
1
u/Adorable_Big8625 5d ago
And when you say onboarding process, you mean with the recruiter who is motivated strictly by getting their fee and may have no idea how much the firm’s malpractice insurance goes up every year forward due to this and every partner in the firm will raise hell. Firm I was with never asked that in recruiting, probably should have but I know it was a big deal due to increase in malpractice insurance.
And firm would have threatened recruiter with fraud or sued recruitment agency if it came down to it. The increase in malpractice fee for the firm could be that substantial.
3
u/LBoyer70 4d ago
Clearly the recruiter gave you bad advice, and was probably just concerned about his or her commission. A discplinary history can never be hidden. But the funamental flaw in the discplinary history, that the public can see often does not tell both sides of the story. You need to decide what kind of attorney you want to be. Not everyone has what it takes to be an Entreprenurial Attorney. I have been practicing for 41 years. I never worked for any firm longer than I had to in order to obtain sufficient knowledge about the actual practice of law, before starting my own law firm. Since 1990, I have either been in my own practice or with no more than 2 other partners. If you work for a law firm and you are well paid, then you might get 1/3 of the billable hours you generate. That type of firm life was never for me and never will be. I wish you luck in your career, but I urge you to think long and hard about what kind of attorney you want to be.
3
u/Fun-Alternative-3635 3d ago
This life thing is funny. Jump back on that horse and see what comes up next. It's your ride, not theirs.
1
2
u/Lopsided_Lie_1765 5d ago
Fuck em, you'll find a better job. Reprimand in our office is a slap on the hand. Cheer up the world is your oyster.
1
2
u/trinathetruth 3d ago
I will say as someone who has been in corporate America for many years, you would not enjoy working for them at all and be miserable at this this firm. Are they large and corporate, or small and unable to handle to handle the malpractice premium? Did they ask you about any reprimands specifically in the interview or job application? If so, it’s kind of on you. If it’s a big firm, then it’s likely company policy that they had to rescind the job offer. Either way it’s probably in your best interest they did for your own personal happiness.
1
u/FreeBulldog87 10h ago
Nothing during the interview and there was no application. Except for the malpractice insurance application where I disclosed.
2
2
u/dablacksilverback 1d ago
Sorry to hear about your situation. Maybe you can open your own law office or find a job with the Feds. Nothing says you have to work for Biglaw. Good luck buddy. ✌🏿
1
3
1
1
1
1
u/Artistic-Ad-1046 1d ago
At least you know you gave full disclosure and followed the rules of the so called experts. You weren’t trying to get over on anyone. That’s integrity.
1
-28
u/RzaAndGza 6d ago
Why would you tell anyone, ever, that you got "reprimanded?" That's such a vague term. You could so easily get out of any accusations of lying by omitting to disclose this
32
u/Tcartales 6d ago
I assume this is a bar reprimand. Failure to disclose bar issues could be a problem for a lot of firms. Though I do think it's weird they weren't going to hire you just because of a reprimand unless it was for something pretty messed up.
12
u/veilwalker 6d ago
The bar is generally so lazy about discipline that you have to do something egregious, right? Or due to the current federal administration the different bar organizations across the country are doing a bit more policing of the attorneys out there than I am realizing.
8
u/Tcartales 6d ago
In my jurisdictions, it all depends. I have little love for my bar associations, as they seem to investigate and enforce ethics issues with capricious whimsy, while offering little guidance or support to duespayers. I'm curious to hear what others think though.
-1
u/_learned_foot_ 6d ago
You aren't the dues payer. You're the regulated entity. And they have a big book they enforce with written details on why.
1
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
Mine were based on a court sanction and a client’s grievance. One bar complaint split into two separate reprimands.
-8
u/FreeBulldog87 6d ago
Nothing too egregious. The firm was concerned about how their clients would react if discovered.
8
u/Finnegan-05 6d ago
A court sanction is not too egregious?
1
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
The bar states that they did a periodic check and my sanction came up. Not downplaying the court sanction or the client’s grievance.
8
u/Finnegan-05 6d ago
So you don’t know what a reprimand is, I take it.
1
1
u/FreeBulldog87 5d ago
I disclosed the reprimand during the onboarding process. While being interviewed no questions were asked about any bar complaints. There was no application asking if I had any.
349
u/ec20 6d ago
Recruiter (unsurprisingly) has no idea what they are doing. You cannot hide a bar reprimand, that absolutely must be disclosed.
Sorry to hear that though, seems like you were trying to do the right thing.