"In this scenario, where Saul is the money launderer, he is conspiring with the other two. Now he goes from lawyer to participant," Stern said. "If he is actively working with the ne'er-do-wells to commit a crime, then he can be a co-conspirator or co-felon."
... While Saul may only be "advising" his clients that they might want to consider purchasing a business for the purpose of laundering money, he can be considered an accomplice.
"An attorney cannot assist a client in the commission of a crime or a fraud," Mason said. "A lawyer shall not counsel to assist or engage in conduct that is illegal. You can get prosecuted for it and it's unethical."
I was also perplexed by The New Republic's use of Saul throughout Noam Scheiber's article about the allegedly imminent demise of biglaw. I mean, Scheiber could be right or not (this isn't the venue for that discussion), but what the heck does solo practitioner Saul Goodman have to do with it?
Article behind a paywall and I don't want to pay?
ReplyDeleteBetter call Saul!
Sorry. Oops. Fair use excerpt?
ReplyDelete"In this scenario, where Saul is the money launderer, he is conspiring with the other two. Now he goes from lawyer to participant," Stern said. "If he is actively working with the ne'er-do-wells to commit a crime, then he can be a co-conspirator or co-felon."
... While Saul may only be "advising" his clients that they might want to consider purchasing a business for the purpose of laundering money, he can be considered an accomplice.
"An attorney cannot assist a client in the commission of a crime or a fraud," Mason said. "A lawyer shall not counsel to assist or engage in conduct that is illegal. You can get prosecuted for it and it's unethical."
I was also perplexed by The New Republic's use of Saul throughout Noam Scheiber's article about the allegedly imminent demise of biglaw. I mean, Scheiber could be right or not (this isn't the venue for that discussion), but what the heck does solo practitioner Saul Goodman have to do with it?
ReplyDelete