BAR COMPLAINTS: WHOSE JOB IS IT, ANYWAY?  Ethics in Idaho believes complaints are the true duty of the ISB members, themselves.   This is the intent, anyway, of this oxymoronic “self-regulation” whose processes are designed for use by its members.  There are always two parties and a Judge in any legal action.  Whenever violations are witnessed and not reported, that is essential participation.  Bar complaints on behalf of members against other members are not just encouraged, but sometimes required.  ISB Rules of Professional Conduct (I.R.P.C.), Rule 8.3 states:  A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate authority.  The task of self-regulation is within the ability of each and every current ISB member - and that, indeed, is what it will take.  It seems whenever the ISB believes it is “defending” a member from a complaint on behalf of a non-attorney consumer; they work hard to put their head in the sand.  Since the ISB serves as counsel to its member’s, how can it meet the needs of the public, really?  If they have to decide between two dues paying members, this might raise the level of responsibility. 

To date (12/08) the Idaho State Bar (ISB) received about 500

complaints a year and took action on an average of one. 

This amounts to about .004% of all complaints resulting in discipline. 

Many people see ISB programs as less effective than the Better Business Bureau,

yet they have the highest quality staff/members 

In response, Ethics in Idaho now provides NO SECRECY related to which ISB members have or have not received a complaint.  Saying openly that you filed a complaint (no matter if you are a member of the ISB or not) is within your freedom of speech.   It is believed that increased openness, alone, would increase rules compliance.   How proud might an attorney be that he/she had either no, or all resolved complaints?  When the public cannot know who has or has not had a complaint – why would a member care about avoiding one?   Ethics in Idaho does encourage the public to file complaints, as well; and to publish that basic fact on this website starting immediately.   Ethics in Idaho has a base (and intends to build a larger base) of detailed ISB complaints to demonstrate any continued blind-eye.

Dialogue with the ISB is another one of Ethics in Idaho’s main goals.  Feedback from members of the community on surveys related to the legal profession and court system are hoped to be gathered and submitted in support of meaningful, measurable results by the ISB. 

Ethics in Idaho cannot help every individual file a complaint.  However, Ethics in Idaho can help every individual provide feedback to the ISB.  EI wants the ISB to finally catch on that pretending nothing is wrong, doesn’t fix the problem.  EI wants the ISB to fully recognize its responsibility to the public.  Flippantly, the ISB reminds complainants who don’t like what is happening that they can go to the Supreme Court and ask for changes.  One request Ethics in Idaho would explore, if that just has to happen, is the ISB losing any “.gov” status.  It could become a regular membership organization and be made to fund (from member dues/member malpractice insurance provisions) an independent agency with authority over regulation and complaints.  Over time, patterns would impact premiums/dues for the attorney generating the most complaints.  This would create a double incentive to comply with the IRPC, real oversight and the possibility of a direct increase in costs. 

If you are a member of the ISB or the public who has filed a complaint, please start to use Ethics in Idaho, NO SECRECY program by contacting us.   In order to publish basic information about your or any ISB complaint, Ethics in Idaho requires two things.  The first is the confirmation letter from the ISB that a complaint has been received.  The second is a signed release of information from you giving EI permission to post this fact. EI posts only the name of the person making the complaint, the name of the attorney the complaint is against, the IRPC Rule allegedly violated, and the status of the complaint.  No details about the complaint are posted. 

A LIST OF BASIC COMPLAINT INFORMATION WILL BE UPLOADED TO THIS SITE, ONCE WE HEAR FROM YOU.

HELP SUPPORT THIS PROGRAM BY VISITING THE PHILOSOPHY OF ACTION.

YOU CAN ALSO SHARE YOUR EXPERIENCE REGARDING THE ISB

AND ITS COMPLAINT PROGRAM THROUGH CONTACT US OR BY WRITING admin@ethicsinidaho.org.

WE ARE IN THIS TOGETHER TO MAKE A CHANGE.