1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Former DOJ lawyer faces disbarment for entanglement…

Ethics

Former DOJ lawyer faces disbarment for entanglement in ‘one of the largest kleptocracy schemes in history’

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 17, 2025, 3:07 pm CDT

A lawyer who worked for the U.S. Department of Justice is facing disbarment after pleading guilty for his role in an illegal foreign influence scheme that allegedly stemmed from his friendship and legal work for hip-hop artist Prakazrel “Pras” Michel.

Lawyer George A. Higginbotham, a former senior congressional affairs specialist at the DOJ, prepared fake loan documents, investment agreements and consulting agreements to hide the source of tens of millions of dollars intended to be used to lobby the U.S. government, according to the April 16 opinion by the Appellate Division’s Second Judicial Department of the New York Supreme Court.

The Legal Profession Blog published highlights.

Higginbotham’s work was intended to facilitate lobbying for the extradition of a political dissident to China and to resolve an investigation of a foreign national who orchestrated a multibillion-dollar embezzlement scheme involving a Malaysian sovereign wealth fund.

Higginbotham was working on behalf of Michel, who wanted help with his dealings with the foreign national, Jho Low, according to Higginbotham’s testimony, as reported by Reuters, at Michel’s trial in April 2023.

Higginbotham entangled himself in a conspiracy to avoid prosecution “in one of the largest kleptocracy schemes in history,” the appeals court said. “Anything less than a disbarment is unwarranted.”

Higginbotham pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to make false statements to a bank in November 2018, according to a press release. He did not influence any aspect of the DOJ investigation involving the investment company known as 1MDB.

Higginbotham was sentenced to probation in November 2023 and ordered to forfeit $70,000, the amount of money that he was paid after submitting invoices for work in the scheme.

Michel was convicted of conspiracy and other charges in April 2023 for using straw donors in the lobbying campaign.

Low was convicted and sentenced in absentia to 10 years in a Kuwaiti prison, the New York Post reported in March 2023.

See also:

Despite lyrics mistake by AI, lawyer wasn’t ineffective for using tech in rapper’s case, federal judge says

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Prosecutor ‘poisoned the morale’ of DA’s…

Ethics

Prosecutor ‘poisoned the morale’ of DA’s office with fake harassment texts, disbarment order says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 10, 2025, 9:32 am CST

A former prosecutor in Colorado should be disbarred for faking four texts that she attributed to a co-worker, including one referring to her as a “sex doll,” according to a Dec. 31 hearing board opinion.

Yujin Choi of Denver fabricated the texts in October 2022 to make it appear that the co-worker was harassing her and then “doubled down on that deceit” by intentionally altering evidence, according to the hearing board, which is part of the Colorado Supreme Court’s Office of the Presiding Disciplinary Judge.

Choi allegedly doctored cellphone records and repeatedly deleted the texts. She claimed that her cellphone stopped working when she accidentally dropped it in the bathtub and asserted that her laptop also broke when she accidentally spilled water on it.

“In our view, this narrative is not plausible,” the opinion said.

Choi “pursued a personal vendetta” against the co-worker, criminal investigator Dan Hines, “by launching an informal smear campaign” for reasons “that remain opaque to us,” the hearing board said.

The New York Times, Law360, the Denver Post and Ars Technica (via the Legal Profession Blog) have coverage.

Choi, who was admitted to practice in May 2019, can appeal the decision. She was a deputy district attorney in the Denver district attorney’s family violence unit before she was fired for the alleged misconduct.

Choi sent the four texts to herself, changing the name in her cellphone to make it appear the co-worker was the sender, the hearing board concluded. It was the second time that she had accused Hines.

The first time, in 2021, Choi claimed that Hines had made an inappropriate remark in June 2021, and that he later sent a text that she considered to be harassing. An investigation was closed as unsubstantiated. Hines was nonetheless transferred within the office and told to avoid contact with Choi.

The texts at issue in the ethics opinion surfaced in October 2022. Choi was at a bar with friends when she showed them a text. It read: “Yujin, please stop talking about what I didn’t do to our colleagues. You are using your looks against innocent people. If you want to act like a sex doll to get a sugar daddy … fine, but that will not be me.”

Choi claimed that there were three more texts, all from Hines. They read, “Don’t be stupid,” “Let’s talk,” and “I’m sorry, hope you have a nice weekend.”

By disseminating the texts to co-workers and supervisors, Choi “perpetrated a false and harmful narrative that Hines had sexually harassed her by sending her these messages,” the opinion said.

Choi said she didn’t want the matter investigated, but her supervisors felt a duty to do so and required cooperation. When Hines was confronted with the texts, he logged in to his Verizon account to provide cellphone records and offered his iPhone for investigation. There was no indication that Hines sent the texts, the hearing board said.

Official records obtained directly from Verizon indicated that Choi sent and received the fourth text message in the Hines text thread at the time that she claimed to have received it, leading the hearing board to conclude that she also sent the first three messages. The first text displayed a time stamp indicating that it was sent more than 40 minutes after Choi texted a supervisor about it.

The damage included harm to Hines’ reputation and betrayal of co-workers who advocated for her during the investigation, the decision said.

Choi “poisoned the morale of the DA’s office, contributing to an environment in which victims feared they might be disbelieved and others feared they might be wrongly accused,” the hearing board said. “Further, her actions called into question whether the evidence in the criminal cases she prosecuted was genuine,” tarnished the reputation of prosecutors, and potentially undermined the credibility of sexual harassment victims.

A counselor had diagnosed Choi with post-traumatic stress disorder and vicarious trauma caused by Choi’s emotionally taxing work in the family violence unit. Her lawyers did not immediately respond to ABA Journal emails seeking comment.

Hines told the Denver Post that he “wouldn’t wish this upon anybody,” and he was “living in hell” after Choi’s first accusation. He has sued the Denver district attorney over the handling of the investigation.

The district attorney’s office later determined that Choi’s casework was in “excellent order” with no evidence of fabrication, a spokesperson told the New York Times. The office also thinks that the investigation was properly handled, the spokesperson said.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Attorney discipline records short of disbarment…

Ethics

Attorney discipline records short of disbarment would be expunged after 8 years under state bar plan

By Debra Cassens Weiss

November 21, 2024, 9:00 am CST

The California Supreme Court is being asked to automatically expunge records of attorney discipline other than disbarment after eight years, provided that there is no further discipline during that period.

The State Bar of California’s board of trustees approved the proposal Nov. 14 and sent it to the state supreme court, according to a Nov. 15 press release. The board also directed staff to remove administrative suspensions from online attorney profiles.

The changes stemmed from recommendations by the state bar’s Ad Hoc Commission on the Discipline System. The commission viewed expungement as a way to address racial disparities in discipline and align the system with the practices of other regulatory agencies, the press release stated.

A November 2019 study found racial disparities in probationary discipline, disbarment and discipline-related resignation, with the greatest disparities between Black and white male lawyers.

Reuters and Law360 had coverage of the expungement proposal.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Overwhelmed lawyer blew deadline and faked…

Ethics

Overwhelmed lawyer blew deadline and faked email to cover it up, disbarment order says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 6, 2024, 3:17 pm CST

A lawyer who became overwhelmed with her caseload has been disbarred for faking an email to make it appear that her personal injury client fired her before she missed the deadline to file his lawsuit.

The Georgia Supreme Court disbarred lawyer Andrea Jo Anne David-Vega in a March 5 decision.

Law360 has coverage, while the Legal Profession Blog published opinion highlights.

David-Vega submitted the fake email in her disciplinary case and in an October 2020 malpractice suit filed against her by the client. The fake email differed from other emails sent by the client, the Georgia Supreme Court said. It was in a different font and format; and it appeared to use perfect diction, capitalization and punctuation. She also faked a text and submitted it in the malpractice suit.

The ethics allegations against David-Vega were deemed to be admitted because she failed to file a timely answer to the ethics complaint by the State Bar of Georgia. She was, however, allowed to submit evidence in a hearing on aggravating and mitigating circumstances.

In that testimony, David-Vega admitted fabricating the email and text to make it appear that her client, Fadi L. Milan, had fired her before the statute of limitations expired.

Testifying in mitigation, David-Vega’s counselor said David-Vega had expanded her caseload in 2016 by becoming a special assistant attorney general representing the Georgia Division of Family & Children Services. As a result, she acquired 200 cases in Gwinnett County, Georgia, and 150 cases in a neighboring county. Yet she continued managing her own general practice.

“David-Vega became overwhelmed with her caseload,” the Georgia Supreme Court said, “but continued to take cases because she ‘did not know how to say no’ and felt unable to ask for help.”

David-Vega also helped with care for her mother and stepfather, who had become ill. She eventually “reached a point where she completely unplugged,” the counselor testified.

David-Vega had no prior discipline and expressed remorse for her actions. She also had a stellar representation among judges whom she appeared before.

Testifying in aggravation, Milan said he suffered permanent injuries to his eye, neck, head, back and brain in the auto accident for which he sought to file suit. He had debt collectors calling and couldn’t access his medical records that were being held by David-Vega.

Milan had retained David-Vega in August 2016, although there was no written contingency agreement, according to the Georgia Supreme Court’s opinion. She contacted the liability insurer for Milan but eventually cut off communication with the insurer.

David-Vega also failed to respond to Milan’s questions, even though he called her office over 65 times to ask about the status of his case between January 2019 and February 2020, the opinion said. He also continued to text and email her through April 2020.

Milan notified David-Vega that he was firing her in May 2020. The deadline for filing suit was August 2018. David-Vega falsely claimed that Milan fired her in March 2018, the opinion said.

Milan’s lawyer in the malpractice suit testified that David-Vega had lied, had failed to cooperate in the malpractice case, and had drawn out settlement negotiations for two years.

A special master had recommended a two-year suspension.

David-Vega did not immediately respond to an ABA Journal email seeking comment. The ABA was unable to leave a voicemail message for David-Vega at the number listed by the state bar because the mailbox was full.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Lawyer’s joint sex with boyfriend and his…

Ethics

Lawyer’s joint sex with boyfriend and his daughter was ‘tantamount to rape,’ despite plea deal, disbarment order says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

March 13, 2024, 11:51 am CDT

An Ohio lawyer has been permanently disbarred for repeatedly joining with her boyfriend to abuse his 13-year-old daughter.

The Ohio Supreme Court disbarred lawyer Amber Renee Goodman of Elida, Ohio, rejecting ethics officials’ recommendation for an indefinite suspension based on the lawyer’s plea to a lesser charge, report the Columbus Dispatch, Law360 and Court News Ohio (via the Legal Profession Blog).

“Looking to the misconduct underlying Goodman’s conviction shows that her actions were tantamount to rape,” the Ohio Supreme Court said in its March 12 decision. “Goodman encouraged and perpetuated the sexual molestation committed by the victim’s father, and at the very least, she was complicit in his crimes. But she was actually more than complicit—she actively engaged in the repeated rape of the child.”

The abuse involving Goodman and the teenager’s father happened over a period of four to six months. The boyfriend had sexual intercourse with Goodman and his daughter, while Goodman performed other sexual acts, the state supreme court said. The teen said, however, her father began sexually molesting her much earlier, when she was 9 years old.

“Goodman’s willingness, in the victim’s words, to ‘join in’ perpetuated and added to the abuse that the child suffered, and Goodman became just another ‘monster’ in the child’s life,” the Ohio Supreme Court said in an opinion by Chief Justice Sharon L. Kennedy. “And rather than report this abuse to authorities, Goodman told the victim not to tell anyone about it.”

After the teen reported the abuse in January 2019, Goodman continued a relationship with the teen’s father for two years.

Goodman had pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful sexual contact with a minor, a third-degree felony, in May 2022. The law bars adults from engaging in sexual conduct with a person older than age 13 but less than age 16, when the offender knows the age of the victim or is reckless in that regard.

Goodman was placed on an interim suspension after her conviction. The Ohio Board of Professional Conduct had recommended an indefinite suspension with no credit for time spent under interim suspension. Generally, lawyers on indefinite suspension can apply for reinstatement after two years, according to Court News Ohio.

Goodman was sentenced to 30 months in prison. She was released after almost eight months of incarceration provided that she served 120 days in the county jail and five years on community control. She was also required to abstain from use of alcohol and illegal substances.

Goodman had claimed that past trauma had made her susceptible to manipulation by the boyfriend. Goodman said her father had left when she was 3 years old, and “nothing she ever did as a child was good enough for him.” She also said she had been mentally abused by one of her two ex-husbands and physically abused by both of them.

“At her disciplinary hearing, Goodman portrayed herself as the victim of manipulation and lies, but she failed to explain how that could possibly cause her to molest a child,” the state supreme court said.

Nor did she produce evidence showing how trauma that she suffered as a child and an adult contributed to her misconduct, the Ohio Supreme Court said.

In a concurrence, Justice Michael P. Donnelly said ethics officials would have been able to recommend a more appropriate sanction if “the criminal-justice system properly held Goodman to account for the criminal acts she committed.”

Donnelly said he thought that Goodman would have been convicted of rape if prosecutors had presented evidence available to the Ohio Supreme Court.

Donnelly criticized the Ohio Supreme Court for rejecting a rule change eight years ago that would have required felony charges in plea bargains to have a factual basis in the conduct actually committed.

“As a result,” Donnelly said, “Goodman managed to plead guilty to a crime that does not come close to accounting for the vile acts she committed.”

Goodman’s lawyer, George D. Jonson, did not immediately reply to an ABA Journal email and a voicemail seeking comment. Jonson’s voicemail message states that he is in a disciplinary hearing through Thursday.