Name Calling

The Arizona Presiding Disciplinary Judge accepted an agreement for the discipline of a reprimand and probation

Generally speaking, Mr. York failed to diligently pursue a client’s civil matter, and when he later sued that client, he disclosed information protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or ER 1.6. In that litigation, he also submitted filings that were not authorized by court rules and was the subject of criticism by the superior court, including the following statements:

[Mr. York] has included what this Court believes to be confidential attorney-client information, which is unethical. The Court is further troubled by [Mr. York’s] insults and name-calling of his former client. The Court would not tolerate this from a pro per (or represented plaintiff), but it is unconscionable from an officer of the court. Unclear to this Court is why [Mr. York] finds disparagement of a former necessary, helpful, or relevant. Moreover, it is arguably unethical.

From the agreement

The “reply” also contains a recitation of events, legal strategies an communications occurring during the initial lawsuit and contains the following affirmative statements:
• “(Respondent) wonders if (Kaur) is delusional to the extent that she requires a guardian ad litem.”
• “(Kaur) tried to pressure (Respondent) into filing a federal lawsuit against her office condominium that was pure lunacy.”
• “(Kaur) had the idea that (Respondent) should continue without being paid.

In response to the bar investigation

Between August 22 and 27, 2024, Respondent e-mailed the following as part of his response to the State Bar investigation:

“I have seen Judge Ryan’s ruling dismissing my case against Jasjeet Kaur. I feel that the Judge has wrongfully taken away my voice and my legal right to defend myself. Jasjeet Kaur will now feel free to spread malicious lies about me without consequence, as she did to PayPal. I am also entitled to my opinion that her pro-per federal lawsuit was lunacy. Jasjeet stated I was misleading her when I was her attorney. She took issue with my trying to stop her from filing the meritless federal lawsuit.”

“Is Judge Ryan aware that in Jasjeets pro per federal lawsuit she attempted to use federal employee whistleblower protection statutes against her office condo association.? This is in the public record. Given that , (sic) is it still beyond the pale to suggest Jasjeet needs a guardian ad litem?”

“I just came across Jasjeet’s email where she basically accused me of “obstructing justice, a crime.” You know what that is: Delusional.

(Mike Frisch)