Rallying The Troops

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has accepted the consent disbarment of an attorney convicted of bribery.

From the opinion of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirming the conviction

In December 2014, Allinson—then an attorney at the law firm Norris McLaughlin—complained to Ruchlewicz about a legal services contract then-Mayor Pawlowski had diverted from Norris McLaughlin to another firm. Allinson complained that he was now unable to “rally [his] troops with their checks.” P-Supp. App. 1234. He told Ruchlewicz he was “just talking our dialect of English” and explained, “[W]e’ve been unbelievably supportive in the past and now, you know, the work’s going everywhere . . . but to our shop.” Id. at 1235. He then confirmed with Ruchlewicz that this was “a short[-]term fixable issue.” Id.

After extensive dealings (recorded by two individuals serving as political consultants to Pawlowski who were working with the FBI)

Norris McLaughlin contributed $17,300 to Pawlowski’s campaign prior to the fundraising deadline. Fleck informed Pawlowski of the contribution and asked if they could now appoint Somach as Parking Authority Solicitor. Pawlowski told Fleck that he did not control the board’s decisions but could talk to them. The men then discussed plans for getting rid of the current Solicitor.

Viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, this evidence showed the parties’ plan to steer the Parking Authority contract to Allinson’s firm in exchange for campaign contributions and was thus sufficient to support Allinson’s bribery conviction. See 18 U.S.C. § 666(a)(2). His arguments to the contrary fall short.

(Mike Frisch)