Appendix Vol I — Musslewhite v. State Bar of Texas

Supreme Court brief1989

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

S| _

ee ee, ee ————————

0 { i 3% Supreme Court, US,

3 FILED

S9-9 99 H Sep 14 1989

NO. x)

JOSEPH F. SPA:

ena

IN THE

SUPREME COURT OF

THE UNITED STATES

October Term, 1989

BENTON MUSSLEWHITE,

Petitioner

VS.

THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS,

Respondent

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

APPENDICES TO

PETITION FOR

WRIT OF CERTIORARI

e =

Volume I

Benton Musslewhite

PRO SE

1535 Mellie Esperson Bldg.

815 Walker

Houston, Texas 77002 y

713/222-2288

APPENDICES TO PETITION

FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Appendix

A. Judgment of Suspensi=a Entered by

State District Court.

B. Order of State District Court Denying

Rule 47 Motion,

Requesting Supersedeas.

C. Order and Opinion of State Court of

Appeals Denying Mandamus, Concerning

Supersedeas.

D. Order of Supreme Court of Texas

Denying Mandamus, Concerning

Supersedeas.

E. Order Denying One - Justice Stay by

Justice Byron White, Concerning

Supersedeas.

F. Order of State Court of Appeals,

Denying Rule 49(b) Motion, Concerning

Supersedeas.

G. Order of Supreme Court of Texas,

Dated June 14, 1989, Denying Mandamus

With Respect To Court of Appeals'

Denial of Rule 49(b) Motion,

Concerning Supersedeas.

H. Relevant Provisions of Texas State

Bar Rules, Including Sec. 24, art.

10.

I. Excerpts from news articles.

be Announcement of Probe of Two

"Agent Orange Lawyers"

(Musslewhite and O'Quinn).

10.

ame

13.

National Article Concerning

Dispute Between Musslewhite and

O'Quinn and U.S. Army Over Arrow

Air Cases.

Bar Officials Launch Trial-In-

Press; Announce 17 Houston

Lawyers Being Investigated.

Detailed Article Concerning

"Masters of Disaster"

Investigation.

O'Quinn Complains of Selective

Prosecuticn; Discusses Appoint-

ment of Special Prosecutor.

ABA Jl. Article Re "17 Lawyer"

Investigation, Discussing Mostly

Musslewhite and O'Quinn.

Further Discussion in Press Of

Special Prosecutor and Filing Of

Disbarment Suits Against

Musslewhite, O'Quinn and

Schwartz.

Further Discussion In Press Of

Disbarment Suits Against 0O' wage

and Musslewhite.

Houston Chronicle "Guilt By

Association" Article Re O'Quinn,

Improperly Implicating

Musslewhite.

Another “Guilt by Association"

Houston Chronicle Article, About

O'Quinn, Again Impliedly Tying

Musslewhite to Subject Matter.

Musslewhite Vainly Tries To

Clarify That He Is Not Part Of

O'Quinn-McNeilly-Keen Situations.

Article Announcing 2nd

Disbarment Suit Against

Musslewhite.

Article Stating Jury Tampering

Charges Against O'Quinn Untrue,

Bat Still Bteationiag

Musslewhite.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

23.

24.

Special Prosecution Accused By,

Certain Bar Officials Of Being

"Runaway Prosecutor", Using

"Vigilante" Tactics, And

Conducting "Trial-In-The-

Press".

Another, More Detailed Article

About Special Prosecutor Being

"Runaway Prosecutor", Using

"Vigilante" Tactics And "Trial-

In-The-Press".

Another Guilt-By-Association

Article Whereby Alleged

Witnesses Directly Accuse

O'Quinn, But Musslewhite

Improperly Implicated.

Special Prosecutor Terminated

Because Of Controversial, Trial-

In-The-Press, Vigilante Tactics.

Press Conference By Musslewhite

Concerning Settlement With State

Bar.

Press Conference By Musslewhite

Concerning Filing Of Hartman-

Agent Orange Suit.

Press Conference By Musslewhite

And Newman Concerning The Piper

Alpha Episode.

Seec8 eat Starts In On

Musslewhite Again With Its

Trial-In-The-Press Tactics.

Further Trial-In-The-Press Of

Musslewhite Concerning Piper

Alpha.

Article In Scottish Press About

Musslewhite's Fight With Texas

State Bar.

Article In Scottish Press

Quoting Other American Lawyers

About Same Matters DiscussedBy

Musslewhite.

230.

26.

27.

28.

29.

30.

31.

32.

State Bar Officials Improperly

Discuss In The Press

TheirEfforts To Revoke

Musslewhite's Probation.

Discussion of the Efforts To

Revoke Musslewhite's Probation

in The National Press.

Report of Evidence At

Revocation Trial.

Article About Smoot Of State

Bar Testifying Musslewhite

Did Not Contact Any Victims Or

Their Families.

Article About O'Quinn's "Wrist-

Slap" Settlement With State

Bar.

‘Article Re Settlement With

O'Quinn Wherein Peterson Of

‘ State Bar Admits He Had No Case

Based Upon Solicitation.

Article Discussing "Wrist Slap"

Settlement With Schwartz And

How, Of All The Lawyers "Inves-

tigated", The "Harshest

Penalty" Was Imposed On

Musslewhite.

Article About Musslewhite's

Work On The Agent Orange Case.

J. Disbarment Petition Against Benton

Musslewhite, Concerning

Solicitation.

Disbarment Petition Against John

O'Quinn, Concerning Solicitation.

Excerpts From Brochure Given By

State Bar To Potential Claimants

Showing Failure To Answer Telephone

Calls Not Normally A Ground For

Discipline.

Excerpts From Offer Of Reprimand To

Musslewhite From Committee 4-A And

Rejection By Musslewhite.

Excerpts From Musslewhite's Request

For Change Of Venue From Committee

4-C, Because Of Leaks To Press.

O'Quinn's Request For Change Of

Venue From Committee 4-C, Because Of

Leaks To Press And Hostility, With

Affidavits.

Musslewhite's Motion For Change Of

Venue Ia The Trial Court Because Of

Prejudicial Pre-trial Publicity And

Motion To Interrogate Members Of

Jury Panel Separately.

The "Agreed Judgment" With State

Bar, Agreed To By Musslewhite To Try

To End A Decade Of Harrassment.

Benton Musslewhite Affidavit Filed

In State Court Of Appeals About All

Events, But Particularly About

Selective Prosecution And Harm

Resulting From Denial Of

Supersedeas.

The Referral Letters And Power Of

Attorney Demonstrating That Hartman-

Agent Orange Case Was Properly

Referred As Required By The

"Referral Clause".

Petition To Revoke Probation, With

Exhibits, And Documents Pertaining

To Service Of Same, Demonstrating

Musslewhite Only Had Six Days Notice

Of The Petition And Revocation

Trial.

U. Motion For Continuance Filed At

Revocation Trial, Asserting

Violation Of Musslewhite's

Procedural And Substantive Due

Process Rights, Because Of

Inadequate Notice Of Trial.

V. Plea and Abatement Filed At

Revocation Trial, Requesting

Abatement Until State Bar Complied

With Sections 10-23, Art. 10, State

Bar Rules Calling For Processing

Through Grievance Committee And

Trial By Jury.

W. Rule 47 Motion Filed In Trial Court,

Requesting Supersedeas Of Suspension

Judgment.

X. Papers Reflecting Requests By

Musslewhite Of State Court Of

Appeals To Expedite Appeal And

Rejection By Court Of Appeals.

Y. Rule 49(b) Motion Filed In State

Court Of Appeals By Musslewhite,

Requesting Such Court To Require

Supersedeas.

Z. Excerpts From Musslewhite's Third

Petition For Mandamus, Concerning

Supersedeas, Filed In State Supreme

Court.

AA-1.Excerpts From Trial Court Record

Establishing How Trial Court

Implicitly Found That Musslewhite

Not A Threat To Clients Or Public

Because Court Granted Deferral Of

Suspension.

AA-2.Excerpts From Musslewhite's Motion

To Defer Suspension, Which Was

Partially Granted.

‘

r((eCer_ eRe eee He HE He Ee HE & Ee GF FE

AA-3.Excerpts From Brief Of State Bar

In State Court Of Appeals,

Demonstrating That State Bar Does

Not Contend That Musslewhite Poses

Threat Of Harm To Clients Or Public.

BB-1.Gloria Chaplin's Affidavit,

Establishing Harm To Clients

Resulting From Improvident

Suspension Of Musslewhite.

BB.2.Ms. Chaplin's Trial Court Tes-

timony To Same

Effect.

CC.Excerpts From Trial Court

Uncontradicted Testimony Of

Musslewhite and Newman

Demonstrating That Musslewhite

Objected To Running Of Ad And

Sending Of Letter Re Piper Alpha

Matter.

DD.Articles Concerning Selective

Prosecution, Including Comments

About The State Supreme Court's

Observations Re Selective

Prosecution.

EE.Excerpts From Briefs Filed By

Musslewhite In State Court Of

Appeals, Discussing Points Of

Error, etc.

APPENDIX A

No. 86-44452 (Consolidated)

IN THE DISTRICT

COURT

THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS

HARRIS COUNTY,

TEXAS

270TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT

(]

{)

(]

{]

BENTON MUSSLEWHITE {]

{]

NO. 87-24402 (Consolidated)

IN THE DISTRICT

COURT

THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS

HARRIS COUNTY,G

TEXAS

151ST JUDICIAL

DISTRICT

BENTON MUSSLEWHITE

ORDER REVOKING PROBATION

AND IMPOSING SUSPENSION

On September 20, 1988, the Court called

the Motion to Revoke Probation filed by

the State Bar of Texas, for hearing.

Petitioners in the above-styled,

numbered, and consolidated disciplinary

actions are the Grievance committees for

State Bar District Nos. 4-A and 4-C,

State Bar of Texas. Respondent is Benton

Musslewhite. The Court heard evidence on

September 20, 1988, and on October 17 and

18, 1988.

The Court, after considering the

evidence, arguments of counsel, and

authorities, is of the opinion and rules

that the atten to Revoke Probation

should be granted, that Respondent has

committed professional misconduct and

has violated the terms and conditions of

the Court's Judgment signed on January

29, 1988, that Respondent's probation

should be revoked, and that Respondent

should be suspended from the practice of

law for a period of three (3) years.

On November 7, 1988, the Court

called the Motion to Set Hearing on

Punishment; Expedite Hearing on Motion to

Reconsider, Stay any Order of Suspension,

If Any Pending, If Appeal is Necessary;

Z_ mH mE EP Ee Ee Ee HE SF eS ee &

and or Reconsideration and Rehearing, and

the Motion for Permanent and/or Temporary

Injunction and Stay of Proceedings, both

motions being filed by Respondent, for

hearing. The Court heard evidence from

Respondent.

The Court, after considering the

evidence, arguments of counsel, and

authorities, is of the opinion and rules

that Respondent's motions for

reconsideration, rehearing, stay or

abatement of suspension pending appeal,

and injunction, should be denied, and IT

IS SO ORDERED.

1. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that

Respondent, Benton Musslewhite, be

suspended from the practice of law for a

period of three (3) years, beginning on

January 31, 1989, and ending on January

31, 1992.

2. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

Respondent be enjoined during the three

(3) year suspension period from doing any

of the following: (1) Practicing law

(except where Respondent appears pro se);

(2) Performing legal services for

others; (3) Accepting fees directly or

indirectly for legal services performed

during the suspension; (4) appearing a

counsel or in any representative capacity

in any proceeding in any court or before

any administrative body; (5) Holding

himself out to others as an attorney or

lawyer; or (6) Receiving or accepting, or

agreeing with anyone to receive or

accept, any fee, fee interest, or

compensation in return for referring any

person during the three (3) year

suspension period to another attorney as

a client or potential client. However,

Respondent shall be permitted to receive

fees for work performed or cases referred

prior to the period of suspension,

notwithstanding the fact that the fees

= =

may be received during the period of

suspension.

3. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

Respondent shall on or before December

31, 1988, do all of the following: (1)

Mail written notice to all current

clients, opposing counsel, and courts in

which Respondent has pending matters as

an attorney of record, notifying them of

his there (3) year suspension and of his

inability to continue to represent such

clients; (2) Deliver all papers, files,

monies or other property belonging to

current clients to such’clients or to an

attorney designated by any such clients

or to their current attorneys in the case

Or matter; (3) Refund to clients any

unearned fees, monies or other property

belonging to current clients to such

clients or to an attorney designated by

any such clients; and (4) File an

affidavit with the General Counsel of the

State Bar of Texas verifying that he has

given written notice, delivered client

property, and refunded unearned fees, all

as provided herein.

4. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

Respondent shall surrender his Texas Law

License and permanent State Bar Card to

the Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas,

on or before January 1, 1989.

5. IT IS ALSO ORDERED that the

Court shall continue to employ the

provisions of State Bar Rules art. X Sec.

33; that Hartley Hampton shall continue

his appointment as Custodian for the

purposes only of verifying Respondent's

compliance with the provisions of

Paragraph Three (3); and that the Court

shall maintain and continue jurisdiction

over Respondent's law practice.

6. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

Hartley Hampton shall be compensated at a

reasonable rate to be established by the

ae ele SS SE ll eS sl

—_=

Court and to be paid out of available

attorneys' fees accruing to Respondent,

and Hartley Hampton shall file with this

court a final fee application no later

than February 1, 1989.

7. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

Respondent furnish to Hartley Hampton

within ten (10) days of this Order a list

of all current clients of Respondent with

the following information about each

client: 22 Name, address, and

telephone number of the client; (2) Full

style of lawsuit to which the client is a

party; (3) Name, address, and telephone

number of all other attorneys

representing the client.

8. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that

respondent shall be subject to further

order of the Court relating to

Respondent's law practice, after notice

and hearing. However, Respondent shall

have the right, upon notice and hearing,

to move the Court upon a showing that he

has complied with the notice and other

requirements of this Order, to terminate

the Court's assumption of jurisdiction

over Respondent's law practice. j

9. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all

costs of Court incurred since the Court j

signed the Judgment on January 29, 1988

7 shall be borne by Respondent. f

SIGNED: November 21, 1988

/S/Solomon Casseb

JUDGE PRESIDING

APPROVED:

Office of General Counsel

State Bar of Texas

/s/ |

Steven M. Smoot -

First Assistant General Counsel

/ / State Bar of Texas s

State Bar No. 18774300

P.O.Box 12487

Austin, Texas 78711 :

512/463-1381

ATTORNEYS FOR PETITIONER

APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY;

LS/

Theo W. Pinson

Greenwood, Koby, Old, Pinson

& Bussey

j State Bar No. 160180000

1900 Wortham Tower

2727 Allen Parkway

Houston, Texas 77019

713/523-2727

ATTORNEY FOR RESPONDENT

APPENDIX B -

NO.86-44452 (Consolidated)

THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS

(]

[]

{]

(]

[]

{]

BENTON MUSSLEWHITE (]

()

IN THEDISTRICT

COURT

HARRIS COUNTY,

TEXAS

270TH JUDICIAL

DISTRICT

NO. 87-24402 (Consolidated)

THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS

[

BENTON MUSSLEWHITE [

ORDER

IN THE DISTRICT

COURT

HARRIS COUNTY,

TEXAS

151ST JUDICIAL

DISTRICT

Came on this day for consideration

the Motion of Respondent pursuant to Rule

47 (a), (h), (i), (93)

and (k) of the

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure for

Setting of Security and Suspension of

Enforcement of the Judgment Revoking

Probation, Pending Appeal, and the Court

being of the opinion that same is not

meritorious, it is therefore

AGREED, (sic), ORDERED and

ADJUDGED that Respondent's Motion is

denied seeking the relief therein.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

SIGNED THIS THE DAY OF

Ite

JANUARY, 1989.

/S/ Soloman Casseb, Jr.

JUDGE PRESIDING

APPENDIX C

OPINION

IN THE

COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS

NO. 01-89-00033-CV

BENTON MUSSLEWHITE, Relator

THE HONORABLE SOLOMON CASSEB, PRESIDING

JUDGE OF THE 270TH DISTRICT COURT OF

HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, Respondent

Original Proceeding On Motion For Leave

To File For Writ of Mandamus, Prohibition,

and Injunction

e=2=22=2=2=============2==S=2225SS52=========

Realator, Benton Musslewhite, asks

this Court to order respondent, The

Honorable Solomon Casseb, presiding judge

of the 270th District Court of Harris

County, Texas, to stay, pending appeal,

relator's suspension from the practice of

law.

o _

Relator etceacrs the

eneatibutionatio of various State Bar

Rules relied upon on the underlying

disciplinary proceeding but primarily

contends that article X, section 24 of

‘the State Bar Rules, reprinted in

appendix to Tex. Gov't Code, Title 2,

Subtitle G (Vernon 1988), which prohibits

a supersedeas or stay of an attorney's

disciplinary suspension pending appeal,

is unconsititutional.

The Texas Supreme Court has the

constitutional, legislative, and inherent

authority to promulgate rules

controlling the admission and disbarment

of attorneys. Tex. Const. Art. II, sec.

l; Tex. Gov't Code Ann. sccs. 81.024,

81.061 (Vernon 1988); Eichelberger v.

Eichelberger, 582 S.W.2d 395,398 fn. 1

(Tex. 1979); see also Comment, The

Disbarments: Inherent or Staturoty?, 25

Baylor L. Rev. 368 (1973). The Texas

Supreme Court in its order effective June

ll, 1979, reprinted in 583-584 S.W.2d

xxxiii-xxxv (Texas Cases), stated that it

is the supreme court's duty “in the

exercise of its inherent power to

regulate and control the practice of law

and to provide for the proper

administration of justice." The supreme

court in its preamble to the State Bar

Rules- stated that "these Rules are

adopted in aid of the Court's inherent

power to regulate the practice of law."

This Court, as an intermediate

appellate court, is without authority to

consider the constitutionality of rules

promulgated by the Texas Supreme Court in

the exercise of its inherent powers. See

Banales v.Jackson, 601 S.W.2d 508 (Tex.

Civ. App.--Beaumont), motion denied, 610

S.W.2d 732 (Tex. 1980). This Court also

is without authority to stay the

operation of a rule promulgated by the

Texas Supreme Court. The question of the

constitutionality of article X, section

24 and other State Bar Rules must be

addressed to the Texas Supreme Court.

The motion for leave to file a

petition for writs of mandamus,

prohibition, and injunction is overruled.

PER CURIAM

Frenel consists of Justices Warren, Dunn,

and Hughes.

Do not publish. Tex.R.App.P.90.

Judgment rendered and opinion delivered

January 19, 1989.

True copy attest:

/S/ Kathryn Cox

Kathryn Cox

Clerk of the Court

+. PAL

= vm”

a ee Ser

APPENDIX D

SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

~ P. O. BOX 12248

Supreme Court Building

Austin, Texas 78711

Mary M. Wakefield, Clerk

January 25, 1989

Mr. Benton Musslewhite

1535 Mellie Esperson Bldg.

815 Walker Avenue

Houston, TX 77002

Mr. Steven M. Smoot

First Assistant General Counsel

State Bar of Texas

P.O. Box 12487

Austin, TX 78711

RE: Case No. C-8321

STYLE: BENTON MUSSLEWHITE

V. THE HONORABLE SOLOMON CASSEB,

JUDGE

Dear Counsel:

Today, the Supreme Court of Texas

granted relator's motion to expedite

hearing and overruled the motion for

leave to file petition for writ of

mandamus, prohibition and/or injunction

in the above case.

cc:

Respectfully yours,

Mary M. Wakefield, Clerk

By:/s/ Barry E. Pickett,

Deputy

Hon. Solomon Casseb, Jr.

127 East Travis Street

San Antonio, TX 78205

Hon. Alice Oliver Trevathan

Judge, 15lst District Court

1019 Congress, 16th Floor

Houston, TX 77002

. -

}

APPENDIX E

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20543

JOSEPH F. SPANIOL, JR.

Clerk of Court

February 2, 1989

Mr. Bob Hager

Suite 103

Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20006

Re: Benton Musslewhite,

v. State Bar of Texas and

Solomon Casseb, Judge,

Harris County, Texas-

Application No. A-61l

Dear Mr. Hager:

_ The application for a stay and

other relief pending the timely filing

and disposition of a petition for a writ

of certiorari in the above-entitled case

has been presented to Justice White, who

on February 2, 1989 endorsed thereon the

following:

"Application is Denied

Byron R. White

2/2/89"

Very truly yours,

JOSEPH F. SPANIOL, JR., Clerk

Edward L. Turner, Jr.

Assistant Clerk

NOTE - FOR YOUR INFORMATION: A copy of

this letter has been sent to all

interested parties shown on the attached

notification list.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

OFFICE OF THE CLERK

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20543

JOSEPH F. SPANIOL, JR. AREA CODE

Clerk of the Court 479-3011

NOTIFICATION LIST

Mr. Bob Hager

Suite 103

Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Washington, DC 20006

Mr. Benton Musslewhite

1535 Mellie Esperson

815 Walker

Houston, TX 77002

Mr. Steve Smoot

Asst. Attorney General

State Bar Bldg., Capitol Sta.

Austin, TX 78711

Mr. Solomon Casseb

270th Jud. Ct. of Harris Cty.

127 East Travis

San Antonio, TX 78205

seer tai aa Me tad ait iid ei Ba ia ita AEs cae alin gat ellaal

Vacanar. sit, ‘ 4 A <4

= |

ST ee ee ES re

APPENDIX F

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

1307 San Jacinto, llth Floor

Houston, Texas 77002

J. CURTISS BROWN MARY JANE SMART

Chief Justice Clerk

PAUL PRESSLER HELEN A. CASSIDY

WILLIAM E. JUNELL Chief Staff Attorney

PAUL C. MURPHY

SAM ROBERTSON PHONE

ROSS A. SEARS 713-655-2800

BILL CANNON

JOE E. DRAUGHN

GEORGE T. ELLIS

JUSTICES

February 16, 1989

Hon. Benton Musslewhite

609 Fannin

Suite 517

Houston, TX 77002

Hon. D. Craig Landin

Conner, Odom & Clover

P. O. Box 570

Sealy, TX 77474

RE: CASE NO. 14-89-00041-CV TRIAL

COURT CASE NO. 86-4452

STYLE: Musslewhite, Benton V: The

State Bar of Texas

Counsel:

Please be advised that on this date,

the Court DENIED motion pursuant to

Rule 49(b), in the above cause.

Respectfully yours,

MARY JANE SMART, CLERK

By /S/ Mary Jane Smart

Deputy

* oe ee ee ee. eS

APPENDIX G

SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

P. O. Box 12248

Supreme Court Building

Austin, Texas 78711

John T. Adams, Clerk =

June 14, 1989

Mr. Benton Musslewhite

1535 Mellie Espeson Bldg.

815 Walker Avenue

Houston, TX 77002

Ms. Linda A. Acevedo

Assistant General Counsel

State Bar of Texas

P. O. Box 12487

Austin, TX 78711

Mr. Steven D. Peterson

Office of the General Counsel

State Bar of Texas

P. O. Box 12487

Austin, TX 78711

RE: Case No. C-8485

STYLE: BENTON MUSSLEWHITE

v. THE HONORABLE SOLOMON CASSEB and

THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS No.86-44,452 in

the 270th District Court, Harris County

Original Mandamus/Prohibition/Injunction

Proceeding

Dear Counsel:

Today, the Supreme Court of

Texas overruled relator's motion for

leave to file petition fof writ of

mandamus, prohibition and injunction in

the above styled case. Relator's motion

to expedite was granted. Relator's

motion for temporary relief was

overruled.

Respectfully yours,

John T. Adams, Clerk

By/S/ Peggy Littlefield

Peggy Littlefield, Chief Deputy

cc:

Solomon Casseb, Jr.

49 District Court

Webb County Courthouse

1000 Houston Street

Laredo TX 78040

i La sh Soe of a ae A ys Pe on ae, Paes rT aNG ea r . —. ™ 2 255 cas = reer

arr ee De ° hes : a

Si. ee, a a ors

‘

’

—

Ler, :

aig

‘ '

APPENDIX H

DISCIPLINARY RULES

Section 22. Conduct Constituting

Threat of Harm to

Clients —

(A) Evidence of Irreparable Harm.

Upon receipt of evidence of just cause

demonstrating that a lawyer poses a

substantial threat of irreparable harm

to his clients or prospective clients,

the appropriate grievance committee

shall authorize counsel to seek the

interim suspension of such lawyer as

hereinafter provided. Authorization

for interim suspension shall require

the affirmative vote of two-thirds

(2/3) of the committee members present

and voting.

Immediate Interim Suspension. The

court may enter an order in the nature

of a temporary restraining order

immediately suspending the lawyer

pending the final disposition of a

disciplinary action predicated upon the

conduct causing the harm or may order

such other action as deemed

appropriate. In the event the order is

entered, the court may appoint a

custodian pursuant to Section 33 to

proceed clients’ interests. The matter

shall then proceed as in cases of

temporary injunctions under the Texas

Rules of Civil Procedure.

suspended pursuant to paragraph (B)

shall comply with the notice

requirements in Section 32.

Section 26. Compulsory Discipline

(A) Generally. When an attorney has

been convicted of a serious crime,

counsel shall initiate an action

seeking compulsory discipline pursuant

to this section. Except as otherwise

provided in this section, the

provisions of this Article relating to

the procedure in disciplinary actions

shall apply to actions brought

hereunder. Proceedings hereunder are

not exclusive in that an attorney may

be tried on the underlying facts as

well as upon the conviction itself.

(B) Serious Crime Defined. A

serious crime, for the purpose of this

section, shall be any felony involving

moral turpitude or any misdemeanor

involving theft, embezzlement, or

fraudulent misappropriation of money or

other property. A conviction for the

attempt, conspiracy, or solicitation of

another to commit a serious crime shall

also be deemed to be a conviction of a

serious crime for the purposes of this

rule. The determination of whether a

particular conviction constitutes a

conviction of a serious crime is a

question of law to be determined by the

court. :

action brought to discipline an

attorney who has been convicted of a

serious crime, the records of

conviction shall be conclusive evidence

of the guilt of the attorney for the

crime of which the attorney was

convicted.

(D) Commencement of Suit.

Discipline under this section shall be

initiated by the filing of a

disciplinary petition in a district

court of the convicted attorney's

residence. Said petition shall allege

the conviction and shall seek the

appropriate discipline as provided

herein. ;

(E) Procedure. The district court

shall proceed to hear and determine all

questions of fact and law as

f 5

ear

as é

hereinafter provided without the aid of

a jury. When an attorney has been

convicted of a serious crime in any

trial court of competent jurisdiction,

the attorney shall be suspended from

the practice of law pending any appeal

of that criminal conviction. Upon

introduction into evidence in the

disciplinary action brought hereunder

of a certified copy of the judgment if

conviction and sentence and a

certificate of the clerk that the

attorney is licensed by the Court, the

district court in which the

disciplinary action is pending shall

promptly determine whether the attorney

has been convicted of a serious crime.

Unconverted affidavits that the

attorney is the same person as the

person convicted in the criminal action

and that the attorney is a resident of

the county in which the disciplinary

action is brought shall constitute

competent and sufficient evidence of

those facts. Nothing contained herein

Shall prohibit proof of the necessary

elements in such proceeding by

competent evidence in any other manner

permitted by law. The district court

Shall set, hear, and determine whether

the attorney should be disciplined

within forty-five (45) days of the

answer day; however, any failure to do

will not affect its jurisdiction to

act. any suspenAsion ordered pending

appeal of a criminal action shall be

interlocutory.

(FPF) Disbarment. When an attorney

has been convicted of a serious crime

in any court of competent jurisdiction

and that conviction has become final;

the attorney shall be disbarred, except

as provided in paragraph (G) below. If

the attorney has been suspended pending

the appeal of the criminal conviction,

a motion for final judgment of

disbarment shall be filed in the

pending disciplinary action. If the

motion is supported by affidavit or

certified copies of court documents

showing that the conviction has become

final, the motion shall be granted

without hearing, unless within ten (10)

days following service of the motion

wpon the convicted attorney or his or

her attorney of record, pursuant to

Rule 2la of the Texas Rules of Civil

Procedure, the convicted attorney files

a verified reply contesting the

finality of the judgment, in which

event the court shall conduct an

evidentiary hearing to determine such

issue. If no disciplinary action is

pending when the attorney's conviction

becomes final, disbarment shall be

initiated by the filing of a

disciplinary petition pursuant to this

section.

(G) Suspension. If an attorney's

sentence upon conviction of a serious

crime is fully probated, or if an

attorney receives probation without an

adjucation of guilt, the attorney shall

be suspended during the term of such

probation; however, upon notice and

hearing, the court in the disciplinary

action may impose upon an attorney who

has received probation such further

disciplinary sanction as may be

warranted, including disbarment. If an

attorney is suspended during the term

of probation, such Suspension is

conditioned upon the attorney

satisfactorily serving the terms of

such probation. If probation is

revoked, the attorney shall be

disbarred as herein provided.

SECTION 24.

Appeal: No Supersedeas

- Either party by a disciplinary action

shall have the right of appeal to the

Court of Appeals but, if the judgment

appealed from be one suspending or

disbarring the respondent, he or she

shall not be entitled to practice law

in any form while the appeal is pending

and shall have no right to supersede

the judgment by bond or otherwise.

xO Be ee Le

oe re Cute

DR 2-101. Publicity and Advertisting

(A) A_lawyer shall not make, on

behalf of himself, his partner,

associate, or any other lawyer, any

false or misleading communication about

the lawyer or the lawyer's services. A

communication is false or misleading if

it:

(1) Contains a material

misrepresentation of fact or law,

or omits a fact necessary to make

the statement considered as a

whole not materially misleading;

(2) Contains a statement of

opinion as to the quality of

legal services;

(3) Contains a representation

or implication regarding the

quality of legal services which

is not susceptible to reasonable

verification by the public;

(4) Contains predictions of

future success;

(5) Contains statistical data

which is not susceptible to

reasonable verification by the

public;

(6) Contains other information

based on past performance which

is not susceptible to reasonable

verification by the public;

(7) Contains a testimonial .

about or endorsement of a

lawyer; |

(8) Is intended or is likely

to create an unjustified

expectation about results the

lawyer can achieve,

(B) A lawyer who publishes,

advertises, or broadcasts, with regard

to any area of the law in which he

practices must, with respect to each

area of the law so advertised, publish

or broadcast the name of the lawyer,

licensed to practice law in Texas, who

shall be responsible for the

performance of the legal service in the

area of law so advertised.

published, advertised, or broadcast

pursuant to DR 2-101(B):

(1) Who has been awarded a

Certificate of Special Competence

by the Texas Board of Legal

Specialization in the area so

advertised must state eet

respect to each area, "Board

Certified, (area of

specialization) --Texas Board of

Legal Specialization."

(2) Who has been awarded a

Certificate of Special Competence

by the Texas Board of Legal

Specialization in the area so

advertised must state with

respect to each area, "Not

certified by the Texas Board of

Legal Specialization." Where the

area so advertised has not been

designated as an area in which a

lawyer may be awarded a

Certificate of Special Competence

by sts Texas Board of Legal

Specialization, the lawyer may

also state, "No designation has

been made by the Texas Board of

Legal Specialization for a

Certificate of Special Competence

in this area." Such statements

must be displayed conspicuously

so as to be easily seen or

understood by any consumer.

(D) A lawyer shall not compensate or

give anything of value to

representatives of the press, radio,

television, or other communication

media in anticipation of or in return

eee oT en oe

for publicity in a news item, except

that the provisions of this paragraph

shall not prohibit payment of the cost

of lawyer advertising permitted under

this rule.

(E) A lawyer who makes or causes to

be made any form of written, recorded

or broadcast public communication shall

retain a copy of same for a period of

four (4) years from the date such

communication is first made or caused

to be made.

aaron abel

a |

ANE ERED IAT ATA eee eet See ett eee ee ene ee Tes Re. eee

DR 2-107. Division of Fees Among

Lawyers (A) A lawyer shall not

divide a fee for legal services with

another lawyer who is not a partner in

or associate of his law firm or law

office, unless:

(1) The client consents to

employment of the other lawyer

after a full disclosure that a

division of fees will be made.

(2) The division is made in

proportion to the services

performed and responsibility

assumed by each, or is made with

a forwarding lawyer.

(3) The total fee of the

lawyers does not clearly exceed

reasonable compensation for all

legal services they rendered the

client.

(B) This Disciplinary Rule does not

prohibit payment to a former partner or

associate pursuant to a separation or

retirement agreement.

APPENDIX I-1

Newsday

May 15, 1986

Excerpts from

AGENT ORANGE LAWYERS PROBED

By deca ie Colwell

The Texas State Bar Association is

investigating allegations that two

Houston attorneys solicited Agent

Orange cases, some of which apparently

came from a Manhattan veterans group.

The same investigation involves

possible solicitation through a second

veterans group of cases resulting from

the Grander air crash, which killed 248

American soldiers.

Both of the attorneys, Benton

Musslewhite and John O'Quinn, who

helped manage the class-action brought

by thousands of Vietnam veterans,

acknowledged that they are under

scrutiny by the Texas bar. They deny

any wrongdoing.

And while Texas bar officials have

refused to confirm or comment on the

investigation, Agent Orange veterans

and others in Texas, Washington, D.C.,

and Long Island say they have been

contacted by a Texas bar investigator.

Some of the veterans said the

investigator asked them about how the

lawyers obtained their clients.

Sources aware of the investigation

Say that it is wide-ranging and

involves additional attorneys and other

personal injury cases.

Musslewhite, who has claimed he

represents over 2,000 Agent Orange

plaintiffs, confirmed Tuesday that he

is being investigated for soliciting

Agent Orange and Gander cases.

—

=a a Ea eS

"That's a hell of a note to say we

solicited Agent Orange,” said

Musslewhite, who has led the opposition

to the $180-million settlement of the

Agent Orange case. "No possible way,"

he added. Musslewhite said all his

Agent Orange cases were referred to him

by some attorneys across the country.

Court records show that Musslewhite has

said the majority of his cases were

referred by Todd Ensign, a New York

attorney who is general counsel to a

veterans’ group known as Citisen

Soldier.

All of the referrals were "perfectly

legitimate,” Musslewhite said.

Musslewhite said he paid a referral

fee to Ensign, adding that Ensign also

worked on the Agent Orange case. In

New York, an attorney may share a fee

on a referred case if he also works on

or takes some responsibility for the

case. Musslewhite would not say how

much Ensign's referral fee was.

Ensign also declined to comment on

the nature of his fee arrangement with

Musslewhite, although he acknowledged

that his organization sent Agent Orange

veterans to Musslewhite.

Musslewhite said the Texas bar also

is investigating whether another

veterans' group, United Veterans of

America, passed out information about

him and O'Quinn to solicit three cases

resulting from an air crash in Gander,

Newfoundland. Musslewhite again said

these cases were normal referrals.

Musslewhite said he received the

referrals because veterans are grateful

to him the Agent Orange case.

O’Quinn has participated in major-—

disaster litigation such as the case

involving the Ocean Ranger oil rig and

“

—— — a)

has a reputation for competence and

honesty, according to Tom Weatherly, a

senior partner at Vinson & Elkins which

was former Gov. John Connally's old

firm. O'Quinn declined to comment on

the bar investigation.

But his Houston attorney, David

Berg, said he would confirm "leaks"

that the bar is investigating O'Quinn

in connection with solicitation of

Gander cases.

In relation to Agent Orange, Berg

added, “It's just a general

investigation of virtually every

lawyer, at least any lawyer in this

city, who was involved in the Agent

Orange case." Berg said he assumes the

Agent Orange investigation concerns

soliciting, an allegation O'Quinn

denies.

Berg added, "All I can say is what

they say in Texas: No matter how thin

~_ sm

, “ +4 4

. > fig

——

‘

«ts OF TS os. wae

ben

‘

APPENDIX I-2

THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL

June 2, 1986

Excerpts from

Allegations of Solicitation

Army, Lawyers Feud Over Crash

By Gary Taylor

Special to The National Law Journal

HOUSTON - Two prominent ‘local

attorneys have declared war on the U.S.

Army over its comments about

solicitation of clients after last

December's crash of an Arrow Air DC-8.

The attorneys - Benton Musslewhite,

a sole practitioner here, and John

O'Quinn of O'Quinn & Associates - have

criticized the Army for mentioning

their names in discussing complaints

from families of some soldiers killed

in that disaster near Gander,

Newfoundland. The Army has called the

whole matter a misunderstanding.

Both Messrs. Musslewhite and O'Quinn

noted that the Army has compiled its

own list of firms specializing in

aircraft matters, which was sent to

potential plaintiffs - neither of the

lawyers appears on the list - and that

it has sent legal assistants to explain

litigation procedures to the dead

servicemen's families.

The dispute probably will not go

much further than the exchange of

letters that already has occurred.

But, in the process, the Army has

claimed there were several solicitation

problems stemming from the disaster,

which claimed the lives of 248

servicemen. (NLJ. Feb 3.)

"A number of attorneys have

initiated contacts. There was a great

deal of it at first," said Maj. John

Meixell, deputy at the Office of the

Judge Advocate General in Washington,

D.C.

me :

Monitoring Situation

So far, Major Meixell has not

forwarded any complaints to local bar

associations for investigation. But he

said his office is maintaining a file

on the problem and will continue to

monitor the situation.

The major was quick to emphasize

that he has not been critical of

Messrs. Musslewhite and O'Quinn and

that he never initiated any discussions

about the solicitation complaints

filtering into his offie.

But Major Meixell described one

instance in which a man claiming to be

a minister called a grieving family

with an offer to lead them in a

telephone prayer session. After the

"“amens" were said, the alleged minister

followed up with some legal referrals.

In another case, a man contacted a

family

two days after the crash and asked to

speak with the dead soldier. When told

about the mishap, he identified himself

as an investigator for a law firm and

offered to help find attorneys to

handle the litigation.

Neither of those incidents involved

Messrs. Musslewhite and O'Quinn, who

represent three servicemen's families

through referrals from veterans

familiar with Mr. Musslewhite's work

seeking awards for Vietnam servicemen

injured by the defoliant Agent Orange.

Responding to the press reports

mentioning his name, Mr. Musslewhite

fumed: “The Army should spend its time

Cleaning up its own house by doing

something about the planes on which it

flies servicemen.. If my clients cannot.

refer lawsuits to me, I may as well

close up shop.”

Added Mr.O'Quinn: "Even though the

’ ew aa lCrrrrC oll

me Ee Ee ee ae a +e

Army is not a defendant in the crash,

they are not disinterested."

Mr. Musslewhite predicted that the

Army may eventually end up as a

defendant in some suits, and he charged

that it has overstepped its bounds in

helping the families locate private’

counsel.

»-

Major Meixell also compiled a list

of eight private firms boasting

experiene in aircraft litigation, and

forwarded that list to the families.

When some other firms complained

about their omission from the list, he

said, his office reviewed their

credentials and added three more firms.

'Overreacting'

The existence of those lists

prompted Mr.O'Quinn to charge that the

Army itself is soliciting on behalf of

the firms it has listed.

Major Meixell said Mr. Musslewhite

and Mr. O'Quinn are “overreacting” to

published reports of his comments.

After reading a letter from Mr.

Musslewhite, the major said: "I'm at a

loss as to why he's so upset. By

having free legal-assistance attorneys

available to the families we informed

them of their rights. We checked with

the American Bar Association and they

had no referral list on airline

crashes. The families have received a

worthwhile service.”

But Mr. Musslewhite remains

unimpressed.

"I just can't believed they jumped

on us." he said. "They criticized

all the lawyers who got cases without

being on their list. I've spent

$300,000 of my own money on the Agent

Orange cases. I'm steamed about it."

xe 3

Ce tesh

> 3

wet

pets See ee

= eft mal

APPENDIX I-=3

The Texas Lawyer

June ll, 1986

Vol. 2, No. ll

Excerpts

Bar investigating alleged solicitation

By Ronda Baker

The State Bar of Texas is

investigating 17 Houston-area lawyers

for alleged misconduct and one of the

lawyers under scrutiny said he thinks

most if not all of the allegations deal

with improper solicitation of clients.

Houston solo practitioner Benton

Musslewhite said he received a letter

from the bar asking him how clients

were referred to him in the Agent

Orange and Arrow Air,crashes and

several other personai-injury cases

during the last several years.

Musslewhite calling the investigation a

"witchhunt.” denied any wrongdoing and

said he had not heard from bar

investigators since responding to that

letter.

"This is a broad-brush type of

inguiry. They're asking me how I was

hired in those cases. The day they

make that (legitimate referrals)

illegal, we can all shut down our

offices and go home."

Musslewhite represents three

clients in the Gander, Newfoundland

crash case with Houston lawyer John

O'Quinn, who is reportedly under

investigation by the same Houston

grievance committee, and Miami lawyer

Charles Lipcom. O'Quinn has said the

bar is looking into the way he and

Musslewhite signed up clients in that

and the Agent Orange cases.

Musslewhite and O'Quinn were on the

nine-lawyer team that helped negotiate

the establishment of a $180 million

settlement fund for victims with

several chemical companies who

manufactured the defoliant.

The Army provided each victim's

family with a legal assistant to help

the family locate a lawyer and

negotiate fees. Also provided was an

Army prepared list of law firms

experienced in aviation laws. The

firms had been involved in negotiations

with the Army to reduce fees by about

15 percent overall, a Pentagon

spokesman has been quoted as saying.

Musslewhite and the Houston lawfirm

O'Quinn & Associates were not on the

list.

Maj. John Meixell of the Office of

Judge Advocate General in Washington

has said some non-listed lawyers hired

in the case used representatives of

veterans organizations to solicit cases

Or left newspaper clippings about

awards won for clients. But Meixell

has not forwarded any complaints to

local bar associations, he has said.

Musslewhite said he sent Meixell an

angry letter regarding Meixell's

comments. He accused the Army of

trying to get a client to change

-lawyers after he had been hired to

represent the client.

"After the client had hired us, a

lieutenant from the judge advocate

general's office on a particular (Army)

base approached him with a brochure

about a lawyer on the list."

Musslewhite said. He declined to name

the lawyer but said it was someone he

"was at odds with on the Agent Orange

case and who did a very poor job of

settling the case."

Musslewhite accused the Army of

using the list to suggest firms that

would overlook what he says is a case

arguably not covered by the Feris

Doctrine, which exempts the military

from being sued by servicemen.

Musslewhite said O'Quinn has also

been asked about the way he obtained

clients in connection with the Delta

crash. The two lawyers jointly

represent one Delta client and

Musslewhite said the bar has not asked

them how they obtained that client.

The San Antonio Light has reported

that the bar is also looking into

allegations that O'Quinn made improper

ex parte communications with Texas

Supreme Court Justice C. L. Ray while

O'Quinn had a case pending before the

court. The allegations were made in a

public hearing of the Houston Committee

on Judicial Affairs, which is

investigating alleged misconduct by

Supreme Court justices.

O'Quinn's attorney, David Berg of

Houston, said he had advised his client

not to comment on the investigation

which he said has been going on for six

months.

Berg resigned as chairman of the

State Bar District 4-B grievance

committee in Houston because of a bar

policy, passed in April, prohibiting

committee members from representing

any lawyer under investigation for

misconduct. The District 4=-C

committee, whose chairman is Larry

Dougherty, is carrying out the

investigation of O'Quinn. Berg said.

Musslewhite said he has informed the

bar that most of his more than 2,000

Agent Orange clients were referred to

him through Todd Ensign, general

counsel for Citizen Soldier, a

Manhattan veterans group. At least one

~~»

~*~

{td 2 é -

of the three Gander clients was.

referred to him by the Brotherhood of

Vietnam Veterans, affiliated with

Citizen Soldier, he said.

"I do not pay somebody to bring me

cases." Musslewhite said. "If anybody

says I do, I want to see the whites of

their eyes in the courtroom."

Musslewhite said the bar doesn't

"have one single complaint from any

client or potential client" about him.

"We have one of these witchhunts about

every 30 years.”

He accused the bar of being defense-

oriented and said the litigation crisis

has set corporate defendants on a

scheme to discourage plaintiffs.

"Insurance companies, chemical

companies and manufactories have become

very frustrated the last three or four

years with the legal process."

Musslewhite said. "They think the

best way to fight the litigation crisis

is, No. 1, to intimidate plaintiff's

lawyers by investigations so good

lawyers will get out of the business.”

aa eee «6EeelU lC he lC l(t KE lC eel lC lO TC ee Ole lCC ell Ul

-<-

= = om = =

ee ee

ory

¢ fi ;

(

ll —— llr

Po De AE Se ga OE ES MP bik oe one PE

APPENDIX I-4

Express News

San Antonio’s guality newspaper--

largest circulation in South Texas

TEXAS BAR TARGETS “AMBULANCE CHASERS’

Four Named in Allegations of

Improper Solicitation

By Jerome P. Curry

Express News Staff Writer

Four lawyers have been charges with

improper solicitation of clients by the

State Bar of Texas and six others are

facing action after the State Bar

launched a secret probe into what it

calls an international ambulance-

—

chasing scandal.

The State Bar investigation,

carrying “the code name Masters of

Disaster, is outlined in secret files

obtained by-.the Express-News.

One State Bar target, Benton

Musslewhite of Houston and one of the

best known personal injury lawyers in

Texas, called the inguiry and

subsequent disciplinary action «

“vendetta by corporations and insurance

companies.”

Musslewhite already had been ordered

by Judge Solomon Casseb of San Antonio

to begin serving on Jan. 29 a three-

year suspension from law practice in

Texas.

“Youll have to admit old

Mussiewhite has tackled some seriously

big | windmills,” said Richard

“Racehorse” Haynes of Houston, one of

the best-known criminal defense lawyers

in Texas. “And a lot of people backing

the Establishment were on the other

side of the docket.”

Both Musslewhite and Haynes were on

a “hit list” of 10 Houston lawyers in

connection with allegations of improper

solicitation of clients from disasters

in India and numerous Pacific and

European countries, as well as the

United States.

—

Both Haynes and sources at the State

Bar said Haynes was cleared. The

criminal lawyer’s appearance on the

inguiry’s agenda was especially curious

because, as Haynes noted, he does not

practice personal injury law.

Musslewhite said he was convinced

that Haynes was on the list simply

because he had represented him at

one time in State Bar grievance

proceedings.

Haynes did not disagree.

“Your sources are right,” the

defense lawyer said. “I represented

some of the attorneys at one time, and

a witness. There was some suggestion

of conflict. But I did not represent

them in the same proceedings. There

was nothing to it. They know that.”

According to grievance committee

files, the charges of improper seeking

of clients involved cases as diverse as

the continuing Agent Orange litigation

in behalf of Vietnam veterans to the

sinking of the Ocean Ranger rig off

Newfoundland in 1983.

Settlements in the Agent Orange

cases already total more than #180

million. A $22 million settlement was

reached in behalf of injured and slain

workers and their families in the Ocean

Ranger case.

State Bar discipline litigation,

which can include disbarment or

suspension, is pending in state

district courts against lawyers John

O’Quinn, Newton Schwartz and Doug

Cherry.

All except Cherry have been

associated in some way with

Musslewhite’s international practice in

behalf of disaster victims.

Musslewhite, O’Quinn. and Schwartz were

all on the national legal steering

committee in the Agent Orange cases.

Musslewhite believes he is the

lightning rod for vengeance-seeking

corporations. Their attorneys, he

said, “see nothing amiss about

corporate lawyers taking a few dollars

to a disaster scene and having releases

signed; but the same lawyers scream

when other attorneys remind a

corporation’s victims of their

rights.”

In one case memorandum, a State Bar

investigator wrote of Musslewhite that

he offered his services as an attorney

to clients who had not sought his

advice:

“Specifically including but not

limited to victims, survivors, next of

Kin or surviving family members of the

following disasters or accidents:

‘Agent Oranse’ litigation, Air Arrow

DC-8 crash, AMC fire, Arctic Explorer

sinking, Bhopal, India Union Carbide

chemical spill, Challenger space

shuttle explosion, ODC-3 cases, English

Global Marine cases, Global sinking,

Sikorsky helicopter cases, the

silicosis cases.”

Musslewhite said it appeared to him

he had been selected by the

Establishment lawyers as the man to

get.

» 2 — : — 9 — pes ' ~

—— . —_ 2% _— Pe tuk nue > : = Sua ee ee ee : Pe ten at oe ‘ k

’ ae << Seetoe ee, Ea! 2 . igs FS va 3 x ¢ =

> : < : re 4 ee - . Tin

Aches et ; eS Patani > th ne eS Nis Leesa >

“ee - < t . Pn . “ . = ~

rat ah

‘

—

APPENDIX I-5

The Houston Post

July 21, 1987

Houston attorney fights bar's

disciplinary action

By HOPE E. PAASCH

Post Reporter

Houston attorney John O'Quinn, known

for his high-dollar settlements and

Successes in personal injury cases, is

fighting a State Bar of Texas

disciplinary action against him by

attacking the appointment of a special

prosecutor.

O'Quinn was represented in court

Monday by defense attorney Richard

"Racehorse" Haynes and constitutional

law expert Gerald T. Treece, who argue

O'Quinn is being subjected to selective

prosecution by an improperly appointed

special prosecutor for violation of a

state bar rule that may be

unconstitutional.

The disiplinary action filed last

February in state district court

against O'Quinn charges he paid non-

lawyers to solicit clients, an action

banned by state bar rules.

Also in February, the state bar

board of directors voted to appoint

Houston attorney Tom Alexander as a

special prosecutor to handle the case

against O'Quinn, as well as

disciplinary cases against attorneys

Benton Musslewhite and Newton B.

Schwart.

The Supreme Court of Texas refused

to approve a budget item to pay

Alexander for his work, and the

attorney has agreed to donate his

services.

State pisteiet fetes Richard Millard

began a hearing Monday on several pre-

trial issues raised by O'Quinn's

attorneys. The hearing is scheduled to

resume at 9 a.m. today.

The issues include whether Alexander

was properly appointed and thus has

standing to prosecute tne case; whether

the state bar's rule against

solicitation violates the Constitution;

and whether O'Quinn's constitutional

rights are being violated by selective

prosecution.

Most of Monday's testimony was aimed

at whether Alexander has any standing

to act as a special prosecutor.

APPENDIX I-6

NEWS

ABA JOURNAL

September 1, 1986

UNDER THE SOLICITATION GUN

Allegations spur probe of 17 Texas

lawyers

The eyes of the State Bar of Texas

are upon allegations of improper case

solicitation. The bar's widespread

investigation involves at least 17

lawyers, many of whom practice

personal injury law.

The allegations tend to center on

Agent Orange cases, the Arrow Air crash

at Gander, Newfoundland, which killed

248 U.S. soldiers, the Delta Airlines

crash at Dallas and workers'

compensation claims allegedly funneled

through a Houston firm.

Under scrutiny are Houston lawyers

Benton Musslewhite, John O'Qujinn and

the Houston personal injury firm,

Schechter, Eisenman & Solar. Houston

lawyer Newton Schwartz also is said to

be under investigation, but he said he

has received no notification from the

bar regarding it.

Musslewhite, O'Quinn and Schwartz

were part of the nine-lawyer team that

negotiated a $180 million settlement

for Agent Orange victims in May 1984.

Because grievance proceedings

against lawyers are confidential by

State law, bar officials declined to

comment onthe matters.

Musslewhite, however, confirmed that

he is being investigated for alleged

solicitation of Agent Orange cases as

well as cases resulting from the Arrow

Air crash.

He said he received a letter from

the bar in April asking him how clients

were referred to him.

Musslewhite denied wrongdoing "I

have always received cases from other

lawyers or. from legitimate

Organizations like veteran's

associations," he said.

Musslewhite suggested the bar's

intensified interest in case

solicitation has its roots in press

coverage of the Aug. 2, 1985, Delta air

crash in Dallas, which killed 133

people. He said both he and O'Quinn

handled cases resulting from that

crash.

Two days after the crash, two

lawyers - Melvin Belli's son, Caesar,

and co-worker Richard Brown - arrived

from San Francisco at a hotel where

many of the victims' families were

staying. In the wake of press stories

about their presence, they said they

were invited to Dallas by clients who

had relatives in the crash.

"{ Caesar ] Belli came over here

ove” Musslewhite said, “and the bar

criticized him and started an

investigation into it and into high-

visibility lawyers in other cases

receiving national attention, like

Agent Orange, the Air Arrow crash and

Bhopal [ India ]."

Houston lawyer David Berg,

representing O'Quinn, confirmed that

his client is also being probed

regarding referrals but insisted that

"O'Quinn is catching the heat for

Benton [ Musslewhite ]."

Berg said, “He is involved insome

cases with Musslewhite. Musslewhite

referred some cases to him. But he is

innocent of any wronadoing."

The probe of Musslewhite pomie on

the heels of an ongoing investigation

by the Texas Attorney General's Office

of his connection with workers'

compensation cases tied to a Houston

firm, the "Harris County Accidednt

Board."

In July, the Harris County Accident

Board, a private company accused of

misleading workers' compensation

claimants into thinking they were

dealing with an official state board,

was temporarily enjoined from using the

words "Harris County" or "Board" in

its name.

Musslewhite is one of the lawyers

named in an affidavit a woman gave

alleging that the Accident Board

referred her to him. Musslewhite said

he never met the woman, Wanda Clark,

and that his firm never handled a case

for her. |

"It's a set-up," Musslewhite

responded. "I think I was named to

Spread the heat around among lawyers

who were not involved.

Only two firms

do business with them regularly."

~ _ te lee

APPENDIX I-7

THE TEXAS LAWYER

FEBRUARY 2, 1987

EXCERPTS

THREE SUED BY BAR

HOUSTON LAWYERS NAMED IN DISCIPLINARY

ACTIONS

By LINDA PONCE

The State Bar has filed disciplinary

suits against two Houston lawyers and

added charges to a 3 1/2 month-old suit

against a third.

The Bar is seeking disciplinary

action against Musslewhite in a

separate suit filed Oct. l, 1986, in

270th District Court in Houston.

On Jan. 19, first assistant general

counsel Steve Smoot mailed a second

amended disciplinary sutition te the

court, adding two counts to the suit

already pending against Musslewhite.

~— coe ee ee eee ee ee

The Bar is seeking disbarment

suspensions or reprimand in each case.

The Bar's board of directors voted

in November to hire a special

prosecutor to handle the cases against

Musslewhite, Schwartz and a third

attorney whose name has not been

released.

Board members would not say why

Houston grievance committee had

requested the special prosecutor to

handle the cases - collectively

referred by board members as the

"Houston Solicitation cases" - in

place of Bar general counsel Steve

Peterson.

Grievance committee 4C chairman

Larry Doherty, a partner in Houston

Doherty & Williams, said a "multitude

of reasons" led to the request. But he

said it was “certainly not a reflection

—

—-—

on the general counsel's office."

The Houston cases stem from an

investigation started last spring into

alleged improper client solicitation

primarily involving the Agent Orange

cases, the August 1985 Delta Air Line

crash at Dallas-Fort Worth Airport and

the Arrow Air military transport crew

at Gander, Newfoundland, in December

1985.

The investigation was handled by

grievance committee 4C, chaired by L.

Doherty and former assistant general

counsel Thomas W. Johnson, who is in

the Houston office.

Schwartz, Musslewhite and O'Quinn

were among nine lawyers who negotiated

a $180 million settlement in Agent

Orange litigation in May 1984.

Both Musslewhite and O'Quinn

acknowledged last year that they were

being investigted and denied

wrongdoing.

But Schwartz, charging that Bar

employees had leaked confidential

information to a Houston Chronicle

reporter, sued the newspaper.

Schwartz called the suit against him

"strictly something they've drummed up"

that is politically motivated.

"It's just another shot they're

taking against us," he said. "This

will be dismissed in due time."

He said he plans to challenge the

jurisdiction of the grievance committee

as he did last summer, when he was

asked to testify during the

investigation.

According to court papers, last July

Schwartz asked that Doherty and the

committee be disqualified from hearing

Schwartz's case. ...

According to court records, Schwartz

also claimed that the committee was

ons

Aen

"tainted improperly" by Doherty's

"personal prejudice and motives."

Doherty called the claim that he

received privileged files "an absolute

~-. damn lie." Peterson said Doherty

did not have access to the Bar's

grievance files.

Both Peterson and Doherty said that

the general counsel had given Doherty's

name to two people who said they could

not find a lawyer to file a malpractice

suit against an East Texas lawyer. But

Doherty said he and Peterson had not

and were "never going to" split a fee

in the case Doherty filed.

"He never asked for a fee over

that," Doherty said.

Peterson added: "I don't refer cases

other than for friends, and I don't

accept referral fees." ...

Another grievance committee, to

which O'Quinn won a change of venue

reportedly voted Nov. 19 to take

disciplinary action against him.

O'Quinn's lawyer, David Berg of

Houston would not comment.

v= ve

a) ue :

iy 2 Veo

= se as as

~~.

™~

! .

y =

2 / |

APPENDIX I-8

The Houston Post

February 27, 1987

Bar alleges misconduct by O'Quninn

The State Bar of Texas accused noted

Houston lawyer John O'Quinn of

professional misconduct in a lawsuit

filed Thursday in 189th District Court.

The suit, which alleges O'Quinn paid

non-lawyers to solicit cases for him

and also set up an improper fee-

splitting arrangement with Houston

Benton Musslewhite, could lead to

O'Quinn being disbarred, suspended or

reprimanded. Neither O'Quinn nor

Musslewhite could be reached for

comment Thursday night.

The suit, filed by Assistant General

Counsel Steven: Smoot, alleges O'Quinn

agreed to finance Musslewhite's law

practice in return for a share of

Musslewhite's fees.

Under the arrangement, the suit

Claimed O'Quinn would not perform any

legal service nor assume any

responsibility for representing the

client.

O'Quinn, noted for the large

judgments he has won in several

personal injury cases, collaborated

with Musslewhite as part of a team of

lawyers across the country in gaining

the controversial $250 million

settlement of the Agent Orange lawsuit

for Vietnam veterans.

The suit filed Thursday also accused

O'Quinn of paying non-lawyers to secure

cases for him and claimed he promised

to pay or paid some non-lawyers a share

of his fees in violation of Stater Bar

rules.

The State Bar cited specifically a

lawsuit involving the family of a

soldier who died in December 1985 when

———

an Arrow Air wharter plane crashed and

burned at Gander, Newfoundland, killing

254 soldiers and crew members.

O'Quinn was asked in May 1986 to

respond in writing to “various

allegations of professional

misconduct," the suit said, but failed

to do so.

APPENDIX I-9

(Excerpts from)

The Houston Chronicle

May 10, 1987

Private investigator tells probers of

‘ambulance chasing' for lawyer

By DIANNA HUNT

A man seriously injured in a

drilling rig accident was contacted in

his Houston hospital room by a private

investigator trying to sign him up as a

client for Houston attorney John

O'Quinn, according to sworn statements

from the investigator.

James C. McNeilly, who operates JCMI

Investigations, says in the statement

that the case was one of more than 150

he solicited as a “runner” for O'Quinn

for more than a year.

The allegations of case-running or

"ambulance chasing" are among several

charges of possibly unethical or

illegal conduct by O'Quinn and others

now under investigation by the State

Bar of Texas and the Harris County

District Attorney's office.

O'Quinn attorneys, David Berg and

Richard "Racehorse" Haynes, issued a

joint statement Friday in response to

the allegations.

"In the fullness of time, no more

than six to eight weeks from now, it

will be clear that Mr. McNeilly is not

a credible witness against Mr. O'Quinn

or anyone else," the attorneys said.

"We remain confident that Mr.

O'Quinn, after an airing of these

issues in the (state) district court,

will be vindicated," they said.

The attorneys said they are limited

in what they can say about O'Quinn by a

gag order from a federal judge in

Galveston. The order remains in effect

while Houston federal officials

investigate allegations of jury

tampering in a record $105-million

verdict there.

McNeilly's sworn statement was

submitted April 30 to Houston private

investigator Clyde Wilson, hired to

probe the cases by the state bar's

special prosecutor, attorney, Tom

Alexander of Houston.

The affidavit has been turned over

to the Harris County District

Attorney's office and the U.S.

Attorney's office in Houston.

"I've received some information from

Mr. Wilson and the FBI is taking a look

at the materials," said Assistant U.S.

Attorney Scott Woodward, chief of the

criminal division. He declined further

comment.

District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr.

has declined comment on the

allegations.

McNeilly has been granted immunity

by state and federal prosecutors, and

testified April 24 before a federal

grand jury investigating the alleged

jury tampering, said his lawyer Mark

Vela of Houston.

In the case involving the drilling

rig accident, McNeilly says O'Quinn

told him of reports of an injury in

Belize in Central America.

O'Quinn “told me he did not know the

name of the company, but to go find out

about it and sign the man up for him,"

McNeilly said in the-statement.

After learning the man had been

transferred to a Houston hospital,

McNeilly said he "just went into his

hospital room, introduced myself, and

told him what a great lawyer John M.

O*’Quinn was and tried to sign him up,"

according to the statement.

In exchange, McNeilly said O'Quinn

promised to pay him 25 percent of the

2 REPENS ATTN A TES BINNS

. wae ee Y Ie . a — . - — .

attorney fees he earned on the case,

according to the statement.

The injury led to a federal lawsuit

in 1985 filed by O'Quinn on the man's

behalf. The case is pending before

U.S. District Judge James DeAnda,

although O'Quinn has been replaced by

an attorney who formerly worked in his

law firm.

McNeilly's statement raises

ailegations of case-running against at

least eight other Houston attorneys in

addition to O'Quinn. Allegations

against the other lawyers will be

turned over to the state bar for

investigation and, perhaps, for

hearings before a bar grievance

committee, said special prosecutor

Alexander.

McNeilly's statement also gives an

insider's look into activities that

allegedly go on behind the scenes at a

big disaster.

For example, McNeilly says he

traveled to Dallas in August 1985 to

died in the crash of Delta Flight 191

at Dallas-Fort Worth Airport. He was

so busy, he says, that he ran out of

informational brochures.

"I recall that I — out of

brochures and needed some more of John

O'Quinn's books to assist me in running

the case, and another lawyer (in

O'Quinn's office) supplied them to me,"

McNeilly says in the statement.

O'Quinn has filed several lawsuits

on behalf of the survivors of those who

died in the crash.

McNeilly said he also obtained

credentials as an officer of the

Panamanian government that would allow

him to board ships at the Port of

Houston to try to sign up injured

. Pa ° »

pera ‘ < — <s

seamen.

"T had an identification card which

enabled me to go aboard any ship flying

the Panamanian flag," McNeilly said in

the statement.

McNeily, a licensed private

investigator, says he did standard

investigative work as well as case-

running. He says he was misled into

believing his actions were legal, when

they may not have been.

"My principal seine wei (be learn

of accidents, contact the plaintiffs in

the accidents, and sign them up with

powers of attorneys for the various

lawyers I have named," McNeilly says in

the statement.

The agreements were not in writing.

McNeilly sare O'Quinn has paid him

about $60,000, but allegedly owes him

more than $300,000.

The state bar has filed disciplinary

action including possible disbarment,

against O'Quinn and Houston attorneys

Benton Musslewhite and Newton Schwartz.

_ = _ at

Alexander said the three attorneys

allegedly used a network of runners-

including McNeilly - to sclicit clients

at disasters.

Solicitation of cases is a violation

ty OR EE RAE OM RN TN RR enn ie ERG.

of state bar ethics rules and could

also violate state law.

Alexander said the affidavits

Submitted by McNeilly and others

indicate case solicitation may be

sagt pe EET OIE SS IE

pervasive in the legal community. "It

is far more severe than I anticipated."

Alexander said. |

Musslewhite has denied the

allegations. Schwartz could not be

reached for comment.

DrcT ALIA LG ADE r _

APPENDIX I-10

(Excerpts from)

METROPOLITAN

The Houston Chronicle

April 28, 1987

State Bar probes 3 Houston lawyers,

bribery allegations

By DIANNA HUNT

An East Texas man whose daughter

died in a mobile home fire said he was

paid $1,000 to sign away his rights to

a lawsuit that later ended in a

multimillion-dollar settlement

benefiting his ex-wife and her

attorney, according to sworn statements

submitted to investigators.

Donald Keen, 27, of Henderson said

a lawyer working with Houston attorney

John O'Quinn also paid him $2,000 a few

weeks later to "disappear" as a

witness, according to the statements.

The allegations are among several

charges of possibly unethical or

illegal conduct by O'Quinn and two

other Houston lawyers under

investigation by the State Bar of

Texas.

The State Bar has filed suit seeking

disciplinary action, including possible

disbarment, of O'Quinn and attorneys

Benton Musslewhite and Newton Schwartz.

The lawyers have denied the allegations

and are fighting the disciplinary

action.

In 1984, O'Quinn filed a wrongful

death suit in Matagorda County on

behalf of Irene Hill over the death of

her husband and children.

Keen said he was contacted in July

1985 by an attorney working with

O'Quinn on the case who said Keen's ex-

wife was unable to sign legal

documents and that a guardian was

needed for his daughter's estate.

é '

After he agreed to sign the

document, Keen said the lawyer offered

to pay him a small amount of money then

increased the amount to $3,000 which he

paid in 30 $100 bills, according to

Keen's statement.

The lawyer later returned to ask

‘een not to testify, saying it could be

detrimental to the case, the statement

said.

He gave Keen $2,000 to take a

"vacation" so he could not be contacted

by defendants in the lawsuit, Keen's

statement said.

The documents Keen signed, however,

ultimately relinquished any claims he

may have held in his daughter's death,

said Keen's lawyer, Joe Shumate of

Henderson.

State law prohibits tampering with

or bribing a witness or potential

witnesses.

Keen's affidavit was submitted to

Houston private investigator Clyde

Wilson, who has been hired by the

State Bar's special prosecutor,

attorney Tom Alexander of Houston, to

investigate the cases.

The affidavits have been turned over

to Harris County District Attorney John

B. Holmes, Jr., who declined comment.

Alexander said the allegations are

among several involving the three

attorneys, who also allegedly used a

network of runners or “ambulance

chasers" to solicit clients at

disasters such as airplane crashes.

Alexander said the investigation has

been dubbed the "master of disasters,"

because of the tactics allegedly used

to enlist clients.

The suit against O'Quinn accuses him

of soliciting the parents of a soldier

ca!

who died in the 1985 crash of a charter

plane in Newfoundland that killed all

258 soldiers aboard. O'Quinn has filed

three suits stemming from the crash.

Alexander said the lawyers

apparently used many of the same

runners who operated a "network" and

rushed to disaster scenes. They

allegedly were paid according to the

seriousness of the suits they

uncovered, Alexander said.

"A broken-leg case was worth so

much, a brain-damage case was worth so

much, up to $100,00," Alexander said.

"They were trading them kind of like

they were trading pork bellies on the

commodities market."

Among the cases O'Quinn has handled

is the record $105-million judgment

awarded in December to the family of a

chemical worker who died of leukemia as

a result of exposure to toxic benzene.

The verdict against Monsanto Co. in

Galveston is now the subject of an

investigation by the FBI amid

allegations of possible bribery of or

tampering with a juror.

Musslewhite has called the State-Bar

investigation a “witch hunt." Schwartz

could not be reached for comment.

O'Quinn's lawyer, David Berg, declined

comment.

' hare omg oor

Lal

eth bits He

Sw kS_""- a

APPENDIX I-11

The Houston Chronicle

April 29, 1987

Houston lawyer denies charges of

improperly soliciting clients

Houston lawyer Benton Musslewhite-

one of three attorneys under

investigation by a State Bar special

prosecutor - denies allegations he has

improperly solicited clients.

"I've never engaged in ambulance

chasing." Musslewhite said Tuesday.

"My cases have come from lawyers,

clients, legitimate organizations and

those kinds of proper sources."

Musslewhite likewise said he has

never been involved in any activity

that could be construed as bribery of

witnesses.

"I have not been accused of bribery

by the bar association, and I'm

certainly not guilty of bribery,"

Musslewhite said.

An East Texas man has said in a

sworn statement that he received $5,000

from an attorney working for lawyer

John O'Quinn, who also is under

investigation by the State Bar's

special prosecutor, Tom Alexander of

Houston.

Donald Keen, 27, of Henderson says

he received $3,000 to sign away his

rights to a lawsuit that later ended in

a multimillion-dollar settlement

benefiting his ex-wife and O'Quinn.

Keen said he also was paid $2,000 to

“disappear” as a possible witness in

the suit.

State law prohibits tampering with

or bribing a witness or potential

witness.

The State Bar has filed suit seeking

disciplinary action, including possible

—

— - ~ ora a! 2

————_—

—————<—— & ££

a == EB

disbarment, against Musslewhite,

O'Quinn and Houston lawyer Newton

Schwartz.

E- == tt

we ~ : - — - ” “

ce ve .

“ > = one ~ - - =

APPENDIX I-12

(Excerpts from)

Houston Chronicle

May 28, 1987

Bar files 2nd suit against local laywer

By Bonnie Britt

The State Bar of Texas has filed a

lawsuit seeking disciplinary action

against Houston attorney Benton

Musslewhite for allegedly using runners

to solicit clients.

The lawsuit filed ina state

district court in Houston on Wednesday,

asks that Musslewhite be "disbarred,

suspended and reprimanded." It is the

second lawsuit filed by the bar

alleging improprieties by Musslewhite.

Musslewhite could not be reached for

comment but has previously denied any

wrongdoing.

The suit alleges that at least seven

non-lawyers recommended employment of

Musslewhite and attorney John M.

O'Quinn to people who had not sought

advice on hiring a lawyer. :

Musslewhite and O'Quinn paid the

runners for “recommending and securing"

employment, according to the lawsuit.

zt further Claims that fees were

promised or paid to the runners.

Such acts constitute professional

misconduct under State Bar rules.

“The accusations against me are

untrue garbage," O'Quinn said.

The lawsuit was filed by Steven

Smoot, first assistant general counsel

to the State Bar, and Tom Alexander,

special prosecutor in the cases against

Musslewhite, O'Quinn and Newton

Schwartz.

A lawsuit seeking disciplinary

action was filed against Schwartz in

January but has not yet to go to

trial.

ee ¢

ee GE . ) Bm a EF wa

Alexander said attorneys will ask

that the latest case against

Musslewhite be tried quickly, as is

allowed in disciplinary actions.

"This case is the result of months

of investigation and could not have

been filed without the help of Clyde

Wilson," Alexander said.

Wilson, a private investigator, has

been working for the State Bar in the

case without pay.

The latest lawsuit also claims that

Musslewhite arranged to split his

attorney fees with O'Quinn in exchange

for O'Quinn's financial backing of

Musslewhite's practice.

O'Quinn would not work on the case

and took the money without the

knowledge and consent of the clients,

the suit says.

State Bar rules label such acts as

misconduct.

APPENDIX I-13

The Houston Post

May 29, 1987

By John Mecklin

and Hope E. Paasch

Allegation of jury tampering

untrue, sources report

Claims against lawyer in Monsanto

case unraveling; confusion with

other trial cited

Widely reported allegations that

prominent Houston attorney John M.

O'Quinn was involved in jury tampering

in a $107 million federal lawsuit

appear untrue, many figures involved

with that lawsuit agreed Thursday.

The allegations, and a purported

investigation of them by the FBI, were

described in March by several Texas

publications, including The Houston

Post. The allegations concerned a

federal lawsuit in Galveston that

resulted in a $107 million jury verdict

against the Monsanto Co.

It was reported that FBI agents

questioned jurors who returned the

verdict to determine if attorneys

tampered with or bribed the jury panel.

One of the jurors said he told

agents he was never approached by

“attorneys in the case, and did not know

that any other juror had been

approached. ...

Related to Alexander's investigation

of O'Quinn is a state bar disciplinary

action lawsuit filed Wednesday against

Benton Musslewhite, a Houston attorney.

Alexander was appointed by the bar

to investigate allegations of

wrongdoing by O'Quinn, Musslewhite and

attorney Newton B. Schwartz.

Wednesday's suit alleges Musslewhite

and O'Quinn saninel seven people to

solicit clients for their law

practices, a violation of bar rules.

Sameimimeeee He ee & we a me

PUNE -

The suit also claims O'Quinna

financed Musslewhite's practice in

exchange for a percentage of client

fees on some cases, without the consent

of the clients and without O'Quinn's

taking any responsibility for the

cases.

Musslewhite said those charges are

false. He acknowledged that O'Quinn

has financed some of cases for him, but

always has either worked or been

expected to help out on those cases.

APPENDIX I-14

(Excerpts from)

The Houston Post

May 23, 1987

Probe of Houston lawyers draws sharp

criticism

Charges of ‘runaway prosecutor'

and ‘vigilante’ tactics

follow investigation

By Fred Bonavita

and John Mecklin

AUSTIN - An investigation of three

Houston lawyers in connection with

alleged. soliciting of clients has

been sharply criticized for "vigilante"

tactics and for being in the hands of a

"runaway prosecutor,” The Houston Post

has learned.

In remarks to the executive

committee of the State Bar of Texas

Thursday, Justice Franklin Spears of

the Texas Supreme Court said he was

"raising the caution flag” over the

handling of the probe by a Houston

grievance committee of the State Bar of

Texas, including the use of a special

prosecutor and investigator in the

case.

Jerry Lastelik of Dallas, chairman

of the executive committee, charged the

investigation was being handled by a

"runaway prosecutor" who was employed

by the Houston grievance committee and

not by the state bar.

Bill Whitehurst of Austin, out-going

president of the state bar, agreed with

Lastelik's characterization of the

prosecutor and added that the decision

by the Houston grievance committee to

solicit private funds to pay for an

investigation gives the appearance that

"vigilante groups are financing the

investigation."

But Larry Doherty of Houston,

chairman of the District 4C Grievance

Committee, reacted indignantly to the

Oooo

bar officials' statements and countered

that they are trying to "“stymie" the

local probe of alleged wrongdoing by

the three Houston lawyers.

"This stinks!" Doherty said of the

comments at the executive committee

meeting. “This whole (expletive) thing

stinks!"

Tom Alexander, the special

prosecutor hired to investigate the

three attorneys, said Friday the

criticism from Austin "kind of rankles”"

him. « « e

The Supreme Court, which approves

state bar expenses, earlier this month

refused to authorize paying Alexander

up to $200,000 to act as a special

counsel in the case. The court, in an

8-0 ruling not signed by Chief Justice

John L. Hill, said there was no reason

the state bar's general counsel could

not handle the prosecution but that

Alexander could serve without pay, if

he wanted.

Alécander was asked by the Houston

grievance panel to look into

allegations of wrongdoing against

Houston attorneys Benton Musslewhite,

John O'Quinn and Newton Schwartz.

Alexander hired Investigator Clyde

Wilson to probe the charges.

Since then, the inquiry has gained

widespread publicity, spinning off

allegations concerning eight other

attorneys and two state district judges

from Houston. Those allegations have

been referred to the Harris County

district attorney's office and the

state bar.

One of judges, Family Court Judge

Allen Daggett, already has criticized

Wilson, asking “who appointed

Mr. Wilson to be watchdog of the bar?"

Wilson and Daggett are scheduled to

meet next week over their differences.

Doherty confirmed Friday that his

grievance committee, by an 11-0 vote,

decided Wednesday night to authorize

Alexander to open a special bank

account and solicit private

contributions to pay Wilson's fees.

Doherty called the move a “vote of

confidence in Tom Alexander."

In his comments to the executive

committee, Spears said, “I'm only

raising the caution flag to tell you

that this thing can get sticky and it

can get messy, and it can involve

pitting the court against the bar. If

that's what you want, that's it.”

He pointed to recent newspaper

accounts of comments by Alexander

concerning the investigation and told

the bar officials: "I get the feeling

that Tom Alexander has taken over-

that he's going to do what he wants to

do, regardless of what's right or what

the bar wants done or anybody else."

The judge said the court was

"getting pressure" from both sides in

the case and said he does not want it

to "blow up."

Lastelik told the judge the state

bar has no control over the situation

Since it had not hired Alexander or

Wilson. lLastelik said many people in

Houston view Alexander as "a runaway

prosecutor."

Agreed Whitehurst: "We do have a

runaway prosecutor down in Houston who

is holding press conferences and...

is trying this case in the papers in

the name of the State Bar of Texas."

He suggested Laselik meet with

Doherty and Alexander and suggest the

press conferences stop.

On the issue of press coverage,

Alexander said, “Certainly, it's no

solution to the bar's problems that we

keep the bar's problems in secrecy."

He added, "The way I feel about that

is the judges and lawyers ought to be

subject to the scrutiny of the press.

I've only answered the questions the

press has asked me. An active,

‘investigative press is the strongest

deterrence I know to misconduct by

anybody.

Whitehurst went on to tell the

board: "The other matter that's coming

up - and get ready - is this Clyde

Wilson matter. That's getting totally

out of hand."

Pointing to the local grievance

committee's decision to solicit funds

“to pay Wilson's fees, Whitehurst said:

"i¢*s geing to cone out - or the

appearance will be - that vigilante

groups are financing the investigation

of lawyers for the grievance process."

But Wilson said the decision to

allow private financing of the

investigation came about only after the

Supreme Court cut off funding from the

state bar.

He said it appeared to him the

Suprene Court's decision to cut off

funding was an attempt to silence the

investigation. "Well, we're not that

easy to shut up," Wilson said.

"If they think they're going to

exert any influence on me, or cover

anything up, they're sure barking at

the wrong dog," Wilson said. ...

Wilson said this week's comments

from Austin only made him more

determined to continue the

investigation and he intends to talk to

the press at his own pleasure. "No,

I'll talk to them (reporters) whenever

I damn well feel like it. I think the

people of Harris County are entitled to

know who the bad apples are."

Doherty charged the hierarchy of the

state bar has done its best to thwart

the local probe of the three lawyers,

including firing the first lawyer and

investigator hired to probe them.

He singled out Steve Peterson,

general counsel of the state bar, for

specific criticism. beteress*s

office, declined comment.

"Somebody is trying to cover up for

some lawyers who have money enough," an

irate Doherty said.

"If I want these people in Austin

interfering with our investigation,

I'll ask for it!"

Doherty said it was only because his

grievance committee “reached out and

sought outside counsel and an outside

investigator" that it has been able to

proceed as far as it has with the

probe.

"They need to leave us alone!"

Doherty said.

wie rr

Seealt,

_— ott

< ‘

es CE: pA, ig ae

ae | vy

‘

APPENDIX I-15

(Excerpts from)

Texas Lawyer

June l, 1987

Probe Draws Officials' Ire

By Mark Obbie

and Robert Elder Jr.

Denounced by State Bar officials and

a Supreme Court justice as a "runaway

prosecutor," a probe of Houston

lawyers and judges has come under

increasing fire from several quarters.

But supporters of the controversial

investigation have responded with

cnangen of their own, claiming some

State Bar leaders fail "the smell test"

by seeking to cripple the inquiry

rather than tackling a significant and

sensitive disciplinary problem.

Among recent developments in a group

of related cases:

Bar leaders lashed out at the

conduct of special prosecutor Tom

Alexander and private investigator

Clyde Wilson, accusing them of

overstepping bounds set by Bar rules

and by the two grievance committees

reguesting their help.

Supreme Court Justice Franklin

Spears, in what he later acknowledged

was a “subliminal message” to the Bar

that it ought to dump Alexander and

rely solely on the general counsel,

dredged up a 24-year-old appellate

Opinion in which Alexander was

criticized for injecting prejudicial

statements into a jury trial record.

Alexander and the Bar's first

assistant general counsel, Stephen M.

Smoot, filed a new disciplinary suit

May 27 against Houston trial lawyer

Benton Musslewhite for allegedly

soliciting personal injury clients.

Musslewhite denied the caarges. The

judge to whom the case was assigned

randomly, 15lst District Judge Alice

Trevathan, is married to attorney

Richard Trevathan, who represents two

men implicated in Alexander's probe.

The investigation into solicitation

of personal injury cases, originally

dubbed the “masters of disasters"

investigation, first resulted in

disciplinary suits against three

Houston lawyers: John O'Quinn, Benton

Musslewhite and Newton Schwartz.

Those suits, filed by the Bar's

general counsel between October and

February, were turned over to Alexander

by the two grievance committees that

voted in favor of the litigation.

Since Alexander and Wilson got

involved in February, they have

uncovered what they say is evidence of

unethical or illegal behavior by at

least eight other lawyers, including

evidence of extensive, systematic

ambulance-chasing schemes. ...

At the open meeting, a tape

recording of which was played later for

reporters, State Bar president Bill

Whitehurst and Spears blasted Alexander

and Wilson for investigating more than

they were asked to do, for their

comments to reporters and for

contemplating a private funding

arrangement for Wilson's fee.

"I'm only raising the caution flag

to tell you that his thing can get

sticky; it would get messy," Spears

warned of Alexander's public comments

about pending cases, adding that

Alexander's probe has gone far beyond

its original scope of disciplinary

cases against three lawyers.

"I get the feeling that Tom

Alexander's taking over {this

investigation} and he's going to do

—

what he wants to do regardless of

what's right or what the Bar wants to

be done," Spears said. "I'm getting

pressure from both sides on this... .

I am literally in the middle of this

thing. . . . You've got a runaway

prosecutor down there trying cases in

the press."

Whitehurst agreed with the "runaway

prosecutor” characterization and

cautioned further that a plan to pay

Wilson from private donations - to

replace the Bar funds initially

approved by the board and then vetoed

by the Supreme Court - is “fraught with

all kinds of appearance problems.”

"There's going to be the appearance

of vigilante groups financirg

investigations of lawyers for the

grievance process,” Whitehurst said.

"I think they stink," Wilson

said. "I'm beginning to question if

this is not one of the biggest coverups

I've ever seen,"

Two judges have been named as

subjects of criminal probes sparked by

Wilson's work. But, despite the

general belief that they are snin-offs

from the Bar probe, their cases' links

to the original Bar investigation are

tenuous at best.

But Marian Rosen, who said she was

acting on Daggett's behalf as a friend

and not as an attorney, told reporters

"this whole thing has gotten out of

hand."

"Iunderstand nobody has retained

Mr. Wilson at all,” Rosen said, calling

Wilson and his probe "a self-styled

investigator or inquisition" of judges.

As to Justice Spears' suggestion

(

that Alexander is unfit to perform as a

. special prosecutor of the Bar, the

justice told board members at the

May 21 meeting to “jot down a

citation." He revealed no more about

the case at the time, but acknowledged

later than an attorney reminded him of

the 1963 San Antonio Court of Appeals

decision that was highly critical of

Alexander. <

Alexander admitted he “said some

things in the case that I shouldn't

have said," and called the case a

"severe dog-fight.” But he questioned

what relevance the case could have more

than 24 years later.

In that decision, penned by Judge

Jack Pope, later a Supreme Court

justice, Alexander was chastised for

riddling the record of a personal

injury trial with prejudicial

statements with a strategy that

"violates professional standards and

counsel's duty to the court.”

ea:b&e welt & gs

APPENDIX I-16

(Excerpts from)

The Houston Post

October 21, 1987

Ex-associates say

O'Quinn paid solicitors

‘Runners' brought Houston

lawyer work, they claim

By John Mecklin

Former associates of prominent

Houston attorney John M. O'Quinn

contend he routinely paid “runners”

thousands of dollars to solicit legal

work for him, according to sworn

affidavits.

One affidavit claimed O'Quinn, known

for high-dollar settlements and

successes in personal injury cases,

attempted to set up an organization to

solicit legal cases from the families

of 248 American soldiers killed in a

December 1985 air crash in Gander,

Bas

Newfoundland. ...

O'Quinn also has appealed trial

court rulings in the disciplinary

action to the First Court of Appeals.

Further trial court action has been

Stayed pending disposition of the

latter appeal.

Tom Alexander, & special prosecutor

handling disciplinary actions against

O'Quinn and attorneys Benton

Musslewhite and Newton B. Schwartz,

said he filed the sworn affidavits

along with his response to the Supreme

Court "to show what the conduct has

been and that it is continuing. ...

David Berg, one of several attorneys

defending O'Quinn in the disciplinary

Suit, said a gag order prevented him

from commenting. But Berg did say,

"Other allegations (against O'Quinn) in

the past have proved false, and you

have to go a long way to find a client

who would complain against John

O'Quinn."

Berg apparently was referring to

published allegations that O'Quinn had

been involved in jury tampering in a

$107 million federal lawsuit. Those

allegations later were found to be

false. .. -

In another affidavit, Mary L.

Market, a former legal secretary for

O'Quinn, contended the cases that

runners solicited for O'Quinn were "too

numerous to recall," although she felt

she could document some of them from

records.

She said O'Quinn told her to ask

runners to send invoices for

"investigative fees" to the law firm.

APPENDIX I-17

(Excerpts from)

The Texas Lawyer

November 2, 1987

Bar dumps Alexander

Dissenters Say O'Quinn

Case Doomed Without Prosecutor

By Robert Elder Jr.

After nearly a year of acrimonious

debate, the State Bar board of

directors has dismissed the special

prosecutor in the Bar's suits against

three Houston plaintiffs’ lawyers.

Board members said their Oct. 23

vote was intended to get the pivotal

case against John O'Quinn off dead

center, in view of the stay that has

blocked O'Quinn's disbarment-trial

because of a challenge to the legal Ps

status of Bar special prosecutor Tom-

Alexander. ...

Leaving the case to the Bar's

general counsel, they argued, may bring

the Bar to a humiliating courtroom

defeat at the hands of O'Quinn's five-

man team of top Texas litigators.

Although most Bar officials said it

was nothing personal against Alexander,

several board members who gave accounts

of the Bar directors' 90-minute closed-

door debate at the meeting in Bryan

said the decision to dump Alexander

stemmed in part from his high-profile

barratry investigation into

solicitation of personal injury

DAGAGEEEES. «6 6 « |

Although the lst Court of Appeals in

Houston did not indicate the reason for

its stay, board members said removing

the issue of special prosecutor would

get the case moving again.

Normally outspoken board members

closed ranks after the meeting as the

board tried to put the controversy over

Alexander behind it.

Even Alexander, whose investigation

expanded beyond the original three

targets to become the most notorious in

the Bar's history, said his work is

done and the Bar's office of general

counsel can handle the so-called

"Houston solicitation cases.”

Alexander said he has turned over

the results of the investigation he and

Wilson conducted to the state's

unauthorized practice of law committee,

an arm of the Supreme Court, the

appropriate Bar grievance committees

and the Harris County district

attorney's office.

The final tally: “about 12

individuals involved,” Alexander said.

The Supreme Court on May 5 denied a

Bar request to pay Alexander up to

$200,000 for his work. In the court

order, Justice Franklin Spears said the

newly expanded general counsel's office

could handle the investigation and

that there was no reason to alter the

"long-outstanding policy” of not paying

outside counsel for disciplinary

matters.

Alexander had agreed to work for

nothing.

The disbarment suit against O'Quinn

hit a roadblock Sept. 4 when the lst

Court of Appeals temporarily stayed all

trial court proceedings in the 189th

District court of Judge Richard Millard

until it ruled on whether Alexander

could continue as special prosecutor.

O'Quinn's attorneys had challenged

Alexander's status as special

prosecutor, saying only the Supreme

Court can appoint such a position. But

the appeals court did not cite that or

any specific reason for its stay order.

Board member Thomas Conner of

Houston said the dismissal was

necessary because “thespecial

prosecutor has become the central issue

instead of the prosecution of those

Houston cases.”

"It had come to a complete halt,”

Conner said.

The resentment over Alexander

tactics first publicly surfaced at a

executive committee meeting May when

then-president Bill Whitehurst and

Justice Spears ripped into Alexander

for investigating more than he was

asked to do and for speaking freely to

reporters.

Spears said Alexander was a "runaway

prosecutor .. . trying cases in the

press.”

Board members said the closed-door

debate made it clear that some members

still resented Alexander's personal

style and felt that Alexander was not

responsible to the executive committee

by talking freely about the case and

going outside the scope of the original

investigation. ...

Board members who described the

executive session also said Bar general

counsel Steven Peterson “swore up and

down,” as one member put it, that his

office could win the Bar's case against

O'Quinn.

When asked directly by one member

whether he had opposed the appointment

of Alexander from the start, Peterson

said yes, the members said.

During a July pre-trial hearing in

the Houston trial court, Doherty

testified about a proposed Bar

settlement offer to O'Quinn. Although

Doherty and general counsel Peterson

eames we ee eee ee

disagreed over who broached the offer

to O'Quinn's attorneys, the offer

apparently was a public reprimand and

an agreement to testify for 18 months

in any suit against Musslewhite and

another, unnamed lawyer.

Peterson said there was some talk

among Bar officials of "a more limited

punishment" for O'Quinn but that was

before the Clyde Wilson investigation

was completed."

Also unresolved is the role of

Attorney General Jim Mattox, who filed

a brief with the lst Court of Appeals

Sept. 25 arguing that the State Bar's

appointment of a special prosecutor

violates the law and the Texas

Constitution because the AG is the

exclusive representative of state

agencies in civil litigation. ...

Alexander also was removed from the

disciplinary suits against Musslewhite

and Schwartz. Both defendants face a

scheduled Nov. 9 trial in Houston

before visiting Judge Solomon Cass of

San Antonio.

Schwartz is charged with four counts

of misconduct, including improper

withholding money from a settlement and

charging excessive interest on loan to

client.

Musslewhite has not accepted a

settlement offer from the Bar that

calls for one year's probation and

three years' suspension. Schwartz, who

is represented by Edward Murr, name

partner at Wright & Payton, said

Oct. 26 the Bar has not offered him a

settlement.

Musslewhite said Oct. 28 he will

file the same motions as O'Quinn,

asking Judge Casseb to stay the trial

pending Supreme Court ruling on the

constitutionality of the State Bar

rules. O'Quinn has argued to the

Supreme Court that the Bar's rules

bannir.g solicitation as an infringement

of commercial from speech rights.

Millard, the trial judge hearing

O'quinn's cases, had rejected those

arguments as well-as the challenge to

Alexander's. status and had set

O'Quinn's trial for Oct. 19 before the

stay was entered.

Musslewhite said he will have a

lawyer lined up before pre-trial

hearings.

Schwartz, Musslewhite and O'Quinn

were among the nine lawyers who

negotiated a $180 million settlement in

Agent Orange case in May 1984.

APPENDIX I-18

(Excerpts from)

The Texas Lawyer

February 8, 1989

Musslewhite Agrees

To License Suspension

By Richard Connelly

Houston solo practitioner Benton

Musslewhite agreed Feb. 1 to a 90-day

suspension of his law license and three

years' probation in connection with a

variety of charges of professional

misconduct, but he refused to admit any

wrongdoing.

The agreement "is not an admission

of guilt on the part of Benton

Musslewhite - it's a compromise," said

Musslewhite's lawyer, solo practitioner

Ray Bass of Austin. “It's simply a way

to bury the hatchet with the State Bar

and allow him to get on with his

business. ss @

Musslewhite appeared at a press

conference called by Bass, but Bass

advised him to refuse to answer

guestions on the merits of the case.

Musslewhite, a prominent personal

injury lawyer who is involved in suits

over Agent Orange and the Bhopal

chemical leak, did say the Bar's suit

had "a devastating impact" on his

practice.

"I know of cases I've lost because

of it," he said. He added that he

settled the case partly because of

family considerations and an "unusually

trying year coming up from the

standpoint of scheduling {court

appearances for clients}. . . As I told

my attorney, I don't see how I could do

both - fight the Bar and do the job I

need to do on those {other} cases."

The snciinint calls for the 90-day

suspension to begin Nov. l, although

Casseb could delay it until Aug. l,

1989, if Musslewhite's caseload

requires it, Bass said.

Steven Smoot, first assistant,

general counsel for the Bar, signed the

agreement but said Bar officials would

not comment further. Tom Alexander,

mame partner at Alexander & McEvily and

former special prosecutor for the Bar

in the Musslewhite case, said he had

proposed a one-year suspension instead

of 90 days.

"I think one year would be more

appropriate, but I can't criticize

what's been done," he said.

The agreement includes a review of

all of Musslewhite's current cases by

Harley Hampton, name partner at

Houston's Young & Hampton.

Hampton will decide if any current

clients were gathered by improper

solicitation, in which case-Musslewhite

will forfeit any legal fees from that

client. ...

The agreement disposes of all

charges against Musslewhite, including

improper solicitation of clients, fee-

sharing, ignoring cases and failing to

return client phone calls.

Musslewhite's cases are to be reviewed

by an attorney who will decide if any

clients were improperly solicited.

Musslewhite's settlement may open

the way to settlement talks with

Houston attorney John O'Quinn, who also

is charged with improper solicitation.

Although the O'Quinn case is the

subject of a gag order, sources

familiar with the case say they

believed the Bar wanted vo get the

Musslewhite case out of the way before

beginning serious talks with O'Quinn.

O'Quinn's high-priced defense team

mounted a challenge to the

nmi Heme He EEE EE EE Be EE & fF

constitutionally of the Bar rules

banning solicitation, and a similar

move by Musslewhite may have played a

part in the settlement talks, court

documents showed. . 6 %

APPENDIX I-19

(Excerpts from)

The Houston Post

June 1988

2nd Agent Orange suit

aims at improving relief

By Kathy Kiely

WASHINGTON - Houston attorney Benton

Musslewhite, who has been active in the

legal battle against manufacturers of

Agent Orange, is making another attempt

to win compensation for Vietnam

veterans and their families who say

they have been injured by the

defoliant.

"I'm going after someone for

wrong@ping my family,” Kathryn Hartman,

wife of Houston cancer victim Ronald

Hartman, said of a lawsuit in her

husband's behalf that Musslewhite

announced Thursday at a Washington

press conference.

Musslewhite represented 2,000

PECT AVA] ARIE rNpy

Vietnam veterans in an earlier Agent

Orange case that resulted in a $180

million settlement.

He appeared undaunted by a Texas

State Bar order, filed in an unrelated

matter, that will force him to take a

three-month hiatus from his law

practice.

Hartman said he believes the

lymphoma for which he is being treated

with chemotherapy and the birth defects

of his two children were caused by his

exposure to Agent Orange during a tour

of duty in Vietnam. ...

Filing the new, class-action suit on

Hartman's behalf will provide another

avenue to improve the relief package

for all veterans and the families of

veterans affected by Agent Orange-

related ailments, Musslewhite said.

"We're going to fight these chemical

companies and the government in every

valley and hill until we get our day in

court," he said.

Musslewhite, who like many advocates

for Vietnam veterans believes the Agent

Orange settlement is too small to

accommodate the veterans and children

believed to have suffered cancers and

birth defects from exposure, had

appealed his earlier case to the U.S.

Supreme Court. ...

In the meantime, Musslewhite said he

believes he has good legal grounds to

bring a new on behalf of veterans who

did not manifest any signs of disease

until after May l, 1984. Musslewhite

argues that they are not covered by the

earlier judgment. ...

: Musslewhite wants to avoid U.S.

District Judge Jack Weinstein, the

Brooklyn jurist who is trying all the

federal Agent Orange cases.

"I don't have to tell you what would

happen if this case came to his desk,"

Musslewhite said.

He said he is likely to have a

better shot of winning in Beaumont.

Musslewhite said he will be able to

pursue this latest Agent Orange case

despite an order from the state Bar of

Texas placing him under three-year

probation and giving him a 90-day~-

suspension from his law practice.

APPENDIX I-20

(Excerpts from)

The Scotsman

July 16, 1988

Piper Alpha families advised to

file claims in US courts

Punitive damages urged

By David Stewart

An American lawyer argued in

Aberdeen yesterday that the families of

victims of the Piper Alpha disaste.

should seek punitive damages in the

state courts of Texas.

Mr. Benton Musslewhite, whose firm

is based in Houston, said he believed

that such courts would hear damages

claims and talked of awards of up to

$25 million (15 million pounds).

"The crucial thing to me, after our

preliminary investigation, is that

there is a need once and for all to

impose punitive damages on these

corporations in the North Sea and to

send a message: ‘You better get safe.'

"The only thing they understand is

the pocketbook. If substantial enough

punitive damages are imposed on these

corporations, they will have to say:

"We can't afford not to be safe. We

have to get safe or we will be put out

of business.' Then they will be safe,

and only then.'

Mr. Musslewhite, who said he had

come to Scotland after speaking to

lawyers here by telephone, said he had

considerable experience dealing with

claims arising from North Sea

accidents. He denied being an

"ambulance-chaser".

He added: "I would stress that my

team will not accept any cases except

through Scottish or UK-based

eeliciters.® ...

Mr. Musslewhite insisted: "We are

not the Bhopal brigade". Asked about

. : é ; . - ~ q zi a ; ° : . = ~ “

~ des is s » fas ’ Sa bY is TRE LS Sheer eh thin . , Je - pe : wee WP Gir es is ¥

“f

the possible level of settlements in

Texas, he said that damages might be

from $l million to $5 million,

depending on individual circumstances.

But if gross negligence was proved then

the jury could also award punitive

damages of up to four times the

original figure.

Mr. Musslewhite said that in a

previous action after an accident at

Great Yarmouth, his company achieved a

settlement of $3 million for a client,

compared with an offer of 50,000 pounds

made on behalf of the company.

Questioned about his firm's

percentage cut in such actions, he

said that it would be fewer than 30 per

cent and probably more than 10 per

cent.

Texas state courts, he added, were

open to foreign as well as domestic

plaintiffs and litigation pursued

through state rather than federal

courts was usually more successful.

The jurisdictional complexities and

favorable punitive damages law make

Texas the best place for suit to be

filed by victims or victims' families

of this tragedy," he said.

A spokeswoman for the Law Society of

Scotland said that she could aot

comment on a particular firm, but if

lawyers here decided that actions

should be raised in the US, they would

require someone in the US to act with

them * . e 7

hes . eae ie Tait ” re age * “F « ?

. aaa Do : rw ss hl Ai he OR Sada FE OR ae ox 4

mH Hm EE Hm em HE aE TET rT CUCU ClO

APPENDIX I-21

(Excerpts from)

U.S. lawyer denies Texas

barred him practicing

An American lawyer Mr. Ben Musslewhite

- who last week promised to fight for

huge damages for families of Piper

Alpha victims - yesterday denied Press

reports that he had been barred by the

Texas legai authorities from practicing

law. «2 « e

Mr. Smoot (of the Texas’ State Bar)

said yesterday he would be filing a

motion with the court this

week to revoke Mr. Musslewhite's

probation. If the motion is successful

Mr. Musslewhite would be effectively

barred from practicing law for two

years. ,

Mr. Smoot pointed out that under the

terms of the action, Mr. Musslewhite

was not allowed to take on any new

clients either individually or as a

member of a team.

He can still continue to refer

clients to other lawyers but, having

done so, must not then associate

himself with the lawyers, said

Mr. Smoot.

Mr. Smoot agreed that Mr.

Musslewhite's arrival in Aberdeen last

week prompted him to prepare the

filing of the motion, as he believed

he would be involved in representing

new clients. ...

"His name gets into the Press a

lot," said Mr. Smoot. "He has

traditionally been invoived in handling

personal injury cases." ...

"In the US the bar is much more

adversarial. It is not uncommon for

them to shoot at a high-profile lawyer

like myself," Musslewhite said.

"I don't know why they do this. It

eT ma He Fe He HE Ee HE He HE EE =

could be greed or professional

jealousy. I will let all of you draw

your own conclusions."

"If I start replying to what they

are saying now, all we will be doing is

hurting the victims more and damaging

the US legal profession. MThere has

been enough damage done already.”

"I thought we were here to try to do

something to help the victims of the

Piper Alpha. Solicitors in Scotland

want my advice about various aspects of

the lew and these are matters which I

think are important and should be

discussed.”

Mr. Musslewhite said he was

considering “legal remedies" against at

least one Sunday newspaper who he

claimed had carried inaccurate reports

about the disciplinary action.

"I think it is a disgrace for this

kind of thing to be fought out in the

Press. You know, Occidental and

McDermott are laughing into their beer

about how these lawyers are fighting

each other."

Mr. Musslewhite is due back in

Aberdeen later this week.

APPENDIX I-22

The Houston Post

July 18, 1989

Statef Bar president to probe

Houston attorney's conduct

Lawyer on disciplinary probation

currently in Scotland

discussing Piper Alpha case

Lawyer on disciplinary probation

piste | in Scotland

discussing Piper Alpha case

By Bill Hensel Jr.

The Houston Post

The president of the State Bar of

Texas said Sunday that Houston lawyer

Benton Musslewhite will be investigated

for possibly violating terms of his

disciplinary probation with the bar.

Musslewhite, 56, has been in

Scotland discussing potential lawsuits

over the Piper Alpha oil platform rig

explosion July 6.

"I am concerned about it and most

certainly will look into the matter,"

said attorney James Sales of Houston,

president of the state bar. ...

Another lawyer who is overseeing

Musslewhite's practice for the state

bar said he, too, will look intc

Musslewhite's activities in Scotland.

Musslewhite earlier this year agreed

to settle a lawsuit the bar filed

against him alleging professional

misconduct.

The settlement included his being

placed on disciplinary probation for

three years. ...

Among the charges made in the bar's

lawsuit was that Musslewhite had

solicited lawsuits.

Musslewhite held a news conference

Friday in Aberdeen to say he would

attempt to have lawsuits stemming from

the oil platform disaster heard in

Texas courts. Musslewhite maintains

Texas juries are more inclined to give

higher awards in personal injury

cases.

He told Reuters over the weekend he

was in Glasgow to meet with solicitors

who invited him to work on the case.

He declined to name the firms.

Houston lawyer Hartley, Hampton, who

is monitoring Musslewhite's practice

under terms of the settlement

agreement, said he is launching his own

investigation.

"I can't figure out what he is

doing," Hampton said Sunday. "He

cannot accept new cases, period. Even

if he is meeting with solicitors, he

can't do that under the order.

Reports of Musslewhite's actions are

"disturbing," Hampton said.

Hampton said after he completes his

investigation, he will report to state

District Judge Solomon Casseb Jr., who

siigned the settlement agreement

between the bar and Musslewhite.

Under the terms of the agrement,

Musslewhite will be suspended from

practice for a three-month period

starting Nov. 1. That period can be

delayed until August 1989 at Casseb's

discretion.

hunsiewhite Laced out Saturday at

stories in Scottish newspapers that he

was contacting families leskias for

business. _

He told Reuters that, because of the

way he has designed his practice, his

suspension will not intérfere with any

cases he has been handling.

He did not say whether he personally

would handle suits brought by survivors

or relatives of ae 166 men killed when

the North Sea oil alae was engulfed

by flames.

Musslewhite told Reuters he believes

he could have won the Texas bar's cases

against him but agreed to the

settlement so he could get one with his

law practice.

The attorney, who had been facing

possible disbarment in the disciplinary

Suit, is best known for his role

representing Vietnam veterans in Agent

Orange lawsuits against chemical

manufacturers.

APPENDIX I-23

(Excerpts from)

Belfast Newsletter

July 19, 1988

Texas lawyer calls foul

An American lawyer who claimed he

can win $1 billion damages for the

families of Piper Alpha victims denied

reports that he had been barred in the

United States for professional

misconduct.

Benton Musslewhite of Houston,

Texas, yesterday described the report

as rubbish.

He was “incensed” by a report in a

Sunday newspaper, headlined "Barred

lawyer courts Piper Alpha families".

"I am considering legal remedies. I

am not barred from practicing law, and

I am not courting the families.

"I have said publicly I would have

no contact with them. I am working

through solicitors in Scotland," he

said.

The newspaper claim that he was

"suspended on probation for three years

and barred from taking on any new

Clients" was false.

Mr. Musslewhite said the grievance

committee of the Texas State Bar

Authority had put him on probation for

three years and imposed a 90-day

suspension.

"It was an agreed judgment. There

was no trial, no jury found me guilty

of any specific act of misconduct."

He could continue to practice law,

but could not take on new clients

unless he referred them to another

lawyer.

"It's correct to speak of them

trying to put a spoke in my wheels. It

could be professional jealousy.

Whatever it is I am not going to lower

myself to the level of a battle of

personalities."

He said he had won multi-million

dollar damages against big insurance

companies and corporations in the

United States. ‘

And he said the bar associations,

which were packed with their lawyers,

had been gunning ue him for years.

He admitted that when he was put on

probation he was deeply involved in

fighting for Vietnam veterans who had

suffered as a result of the use of the

defoliant Agent Orange.

"It frankly meant that other cases

were not proceeded with as fast as I

would have liked.

"It doesn't have one bit of

relevance to the Piper Alpha tragedy."

Mr. Musslewhite said he had

discovered that an American law firm

sent a copy of the judgment against him

to Scottish solicitors who passed it on

to the Press.

"I think it's a disgrace for this

kind of thing to be fought out in the

Press. You know Occidental and

McDermott are laughing into their beer

about how these lawyers are fighting

each other."

Extract from

‘er ee Cd ae £ in aa hl

Le 1 | al

—_ my ¥ ——

AN American lawyer who claimed he can aly BS atetts Sd "§

_—— win £1 billion damages for the families of dey'thl, th bay. eae es

- Piper Alpha victims denied reports that he « veins ET ne Sar oY @.6 | |

had been barred in the United States for st lateye each , Iso 2 “se

¢ professional misconduct. "4 sa cine een a |

J \ Benton Musslewhite of Huston, Texas, Sn one ¥ 4\xie—

i sterday described the report as rubbish £15 miltion each in a

‘} nu Ggowr ‘ prolEessio ! Palousy and

said it was mit efipt By asi

rive

punitinedameges—

He was “incensed” by a report in a Sunday

American law

Lied

— ; - : ; headlined “Barred lawyer courts

co Stricken oil rigg | [Pe Arete eu semeien 1am nt

—— barred from practising law, and I am not courting |

- AGONY GOS OM | | cs rensstee mem | Srey set i ree pi

— Three more bodies trom the Piper Alpha | / with them. 1 am working through solicitors in /, Coupommions:d | Ne SMUG OUMOE at were

=<T sn probation for vee years and tare from | "He admitted that when he was put on

Mr Musslewhite said the grievance committee Nae eileen cit ied eoiheed ant one

ron

LJi a VA

Oe eeleey me ae Gy Say oem ont Piper Alpha tre >

a ne pe — Rit Musalentdte Zaid he hed discovered that an

Bn: abel mm ed ok ~ hey American law firma sent a copy of the judgment

: Se to Scottish solicitors who iton

tot ess.

, haw . “er

: “I think it’s a disgrace for this kind of thing to

spoke in my wheels. It cpuld be professional » ent in the Pees. You kne dental

| jealousy. Whatever it is I am not going to lower | BOOT OOS Laughing nee See

| - gy “million dollar about how these lawyers are ing each other.”

APPENDIX I-24

(Excerpts from)

Glasgow Herald

July 21, 1988

Rig claims put US courts to the test

By ROS DAVIDSON

THE widows and children of the Piper

Alpha victims might face "serious

problems" in securing compensation in

US courts from the oil operators and

designers.

Their claims against American multi-

nationals could be thrown out because

the victims were not US citizens,

according to Professor David Robertson,

an authority on compensation and

maritime law at the University of

Texas.

Yet New York lawyer Stuart Speiser

is confident that the cases could be

brought in Texas or Louisiana and

settled within two years. In the US

Mr. Speiser represents most of the

families of the 45 men killed in the

1986 Chinook helicopter crash.

He disagrees with concerns that

Piper Alpha's suits could be thrown out

by emphasising that foreign oil rig

victims have won in state courts on two

occasions. Mr. Speiser handled both

cases. He filed law suits in Texas and

Louisiana for families of the 84 then

killed when the Ocean Ranger rig

capsized near Newfoundland in 1982.

Some of the victims were British.

In the second disaster, he won

settlements in under two years for

relatives of the 81 killed when the

Glomar Java Sea capsized in the South

China sea in 1983. of

Piper Alpha litigation would be

expensive, Texas maritime lawyer Robert

Chaffin warns that both sides' fees

ae BRE Ee FF SE He we ae we ee ee a

}

could exceed $lm in the state courts.

But he says the award could top $1bn

because punitive damages are influenced

by the profitability of the companies

sued. He also defends American

lawyers' high contingency fees by

noting that he once secured a

settlement for the family of a man

killed in the North Sea in the 1970s

that was 15 times higher than the

company offer. He concludes: "Cases

should be brought where the widows and

children can get the most money."

Comment By Fetrowe:

*6peiser was not himself involved in

either one of these cases; his partner,

Krause was. However, Musslewhite was

on the plaintiffs’ committee with Krause

in the Ocean Ranger litigation and

stayed with the non-settling

plaintiffs, while Krause bailed out

with the settling plaintiffs.

Musslewhite later secured substantially

larger settlements for those who stayed

with the case. As to the Global Java

Sea, O'Quinn was lead counsel and the

one who was primarily responsible for

the settlement of that case.

Apparently, Speiser for some reason

resented Musslewhite and O'Quinn,

because it was he who sent Musslewhite’

probation judgment to the Scottish

press),

jad urd VIIPPYD pue smOPIM IyD | PR 24) JO SaqNusE) JO BURISINO?

suena 1ySn0Ig 9G PINOYS S25e)., |] PUH SEXI] UT SHINS Me] p>) PH

[Sapp MIND a 4340 Aurdwos |} 's2se2 yrog papuey sasieds 4

yp wer y sdyYTIY SoU ¢] SEM TF sUOISRIZO OM) UO SHNOD 1815 UH

Anson sous 2 |

wt pay y wew # yo Apuny ayy | yeyy Sursiseyduss Xq yno umory

20) 1U2UINNIS EF PIINIIS 29U0 24 J 2qQ PjNOD suMs seydiy sadig

peyp Sunou Aq $225 Aruadunuod ff yey) $u129U02 YM 59958SIP 244

yay —s wemiomy p07) "ysesd s2dosy2y yooury >

<p om ) ] 986) 24) Ut Pry Vout sy ryt

yo Aupqen prouany || JO sayyuey 24) JO WOU sjUI59)

“tt aur s2Beur } 99g | | -das sasiads ayy SM) ays Uy “s2824

wqig doy 1 shes] | Om) UIYM P2325 Puc EuersINOT

dy ING] “SLINOD JpEIS 24) UE UGE! | JO Sexdy UH Wwy3nos1q 2q PyNOd

weyr $061 24) UE Ig YON 2y | GOR anny sun Bs po wBI2I0) | -

PAIIL2 PINOD $329 ,S2PHs YOY WEYL) | SI5e9 24) HEY) Wuaprywos $1 22819d¢

suiew wyjey Magoy s24mey \ emg s24me} MN A?

unpre sexag ‘2atsuadx2 2q)

pinom voneduy rydiy sdtg

ay uw pazisdes rag ware 4 ead pue DANeAs38U09

gd UDR PINT LR BYE JO SANE]? sAupoy ‘sisadans

yy savak Om) J2puN UF SyUZU>) $2jOIg “SUNNIDIA

W 2Y *J2;SESIP PUOIIS 24) UY yy woursuad

HEA DEED FO DtIOG ‘cag wi pur

-AnopMaN svau pazisde 8 13] + pynos ty sadiy ‘par

Fury weary ay) aq payry vay] aod ay) Jo a5n

.. Mqusneyd,, 298 “3949

-moy *K182)809 24) OF SpUaWNTIY

| pue — own

se ‘ssaudiziog Aq wy8nosq s2sed

J82y 0} Prsnjas Ajaunnos sary .

SPINOD JOIDPI) S$ Bosauy “Suter

J2tdesip INOAR) SMEY IIIS 15H

urowy jo saqunU y stn

ayy ue apy OF “oyaiy SAN

-UNOD ays “Bt? p MUIIdNG S() Oy)

“soup rydne siunwa eydyy sodie

“20MIN WE “YOSHAqUY PAE] 105

-$2j04,§ OF TuNpsorre “sur S/)

FOU 213.8 SUITPA JY) DAR Y Ihe

UNOIY 3g PFNOD speHONrU-nyner

BRoUMUY SiNETe SHEP JOq]

‘S22UTHApP pur ssopriade pro ayt

WiOs SLINOI ST) HE HONRSUddutOD

Sursnc2; wi simyqgosd snot,

24) JO UIIPpY Pue sMOPM FEL

avi

wIe]D SIX),

JS9} 9} 0} S}.INOD SF Jnd s

8861 1M 12

preys MerTD

usages

——

‘

bake

—.

Or (

REC

od ee ont

244

APPENDIX I-36

ew . re ee

Betract ‘from Glasgow Herald

July 21, 1988

R. 2 ~B Claes wt &. f. Cov arty Fo 7 ‘ne

By ROS DAVIDSO

THE widows and children of the Piper

Alpha victims might face "serious

problems" in securing compensation in

US courts from the oil operators and

designers.

Their claims against American multi-

nationals could be thrown out because

the victims were not US citizens,

according to Professor David Robertson,

an authority on~compensation and

Maritime law at the University of

Texas.

Yet New York lawyer Stuart Speiser

is conficent that the cases could be

brought in fexee or Louisiana and

settled within two years. In the US

Mr. Speiser represents most of the

BEST AVAILABLE COPY

lech

PF eae er ° o~ 7 Se,

families of the 45 men killed in the

1986 Chinook helicopter crash.

He disagrees with concerns that

Piper Alpha's suits could be thrown out

by emphasising that foreign oil rig

victims have won in state courts on two

occasions. Mr. Speiser handled both

cases. He filed law suits in Texas and

Louisiana for families of the 84 then

killed when the Ocean Ranger rig

capsized near Newfoundland in 1982.

Some of the victims were British.

saat bial = FF ee me *

In the second disaster, he won

DA RR eS

settlements in under two years for

relatives of the 81 killed when the

Glomar Java Sea capsized in the South

China sea in 1983.”

Piper Alpha litigation would be

expensivesg Texas maritime lawyer Robert

Chaffin warns that both sides' fees

bam

could exnneet “SS iz the state courts.

But he says the award could top sikw 2 ft

because punitive damages are influenced ig

by the profitability of the companies +

sued. He also defends American

lawyers' high contingency fees by

noting that he once secured a

settlement for the family of a man

killed in the North Sea in the 1970s

that was 15 times higher than the

company offer. He concludes: “Cases

should be brought where the widows and

children can get the most money."

® Speise, wl nel vimsel® ;atteolved

wn eithen pre of tAaese Cases; Aes

A pantoen 1Avre Wit, (Yowtuen,

Pru tthudhite was ow Ae Poach AEE

Canter Vee ae asd sal T vnand

Oecehaw sinasen aPiganey A whe lib

wy. fh TAP wae SOVt we f lam =

hailed eu! aa se the teh .

grare* Om wit beh (%e fata (AVw aeo

; ¥ PA ,

Secvaed ‘cv ostantiolly maeg*s seMlencea ll

, “o wrt t ee rapreepree sent

Pe Ti ee ac may OO

“ ; edd ty the Cle das 24%

Jeter fd P ecovuwle/ Awd

; Sear

' va oO Qwiwn wel A

staves 304, wie art (3) pancarly Refpors 4%

fem panewy! er that Case.

7 a fear nrealed

ww .

fie . - % tf.

oo a ransen)ly , Spe ur? aw’ 0’ Quew~ a¢ “s

, y

" o/a r! :

reuse ley are is iss pa aca

CALS

piGobs dres

peels.

APPENDIX I-25

(Excerpts from)

THE TEXAS LAWYER

August 1, 1988

Two Disasters Spawn Barratry Allegations

Bar Sends Investigators

to Scotland, Brownville

BY ROBERT ELDER JR.

Prompted by reports of lawyers

improperly soliciting clients in the

immediate aftermath of two recent

disasters, the State Bar has sent an

investigator to Brownsville and plans

to dispatch its general counsel to

Scotland in mid-August.

And general counsel Steven Peterson

will travel to Scotland to investigate

the role of Benton Musslewhite and

other Houston lawyers in lining up

clients from the Piper Alpha oil rig

disaster, Sales said July 27.

Although neither the Bar nor

Musslewhite's court-appointed overseer

has talked with Musslewhite about his

activities in Scotland, the Bar has

been granted a Sept. 19 hearing in

270th District court in Houston to

discuss Musslewhite's activities.

The hearing, ordered by visiting

state District Judge Solomon Casseb

Jr., was requested by the Bar and

Houston lawyer Hartley Hampton. Casseb

appointed Hampton, name partner in

Young & Hampton, to oversee

Musslewhite's compliance with the

three-month suspension of his law

license - to begin Nov. 1 - and three

year's probation.

Musslewhite agreed to the

settlement Feb. 1 in a disciplinary

suit stemming from previous allegations

of improper solicitation of clients,

Musslewhite admitted no wrongdoing

when he settled the case.

Sales said the Bar would investigate

reports from Scotland lawyers and news

media that there was a "ring" of

Houston-area lawyers soliciting clients

from the July 6 oil rig explosion,

which left 167 dead.

"There is a suggestion that more

lawyers from Houston are involved than

there appeared to be at first blush,”

Sales said July 22.

Sales said information he received

from Scottish lawyers shows that the

Same group of lawyers allegedly

soliciting Piper Alpha suits "seemingly

has tentacles that may reach back to

prior incidents in the U.K. North Sea

area." 7

Sales, immediately after the

Bar's executive committee meeting on

South Padre Island July 22, said "time

is of the essence” in the North Sea

investigation. He said July 27 he would

have preferred to send Peterson to

Scotland the week of July 25, but the

general counsel first must attend the

American Bar Association's conference

in Toronto before heading overseas.

Hampton said he planned to take

Musslewhite's deposition and begin his

own investigation, which will “overlap”

with the Bar's.

Hampton said he had not had any

contact with Musslewhite since news

media reports of the Piper Alpha cases,

although, he added, he had been on

vacation, and missed telephone calls

from Musslewhite.

Hampton said press reports from

Scotland and England about Musslewhite

are “most discouraging and troubling.”

Wire service reports from Scotland

said Musslewhite on July 15 announced

he would try to have suits stemming

from the oil rig explosion heard in

Texas.

Depending on the evidence heard

Sept. 19, Hampton said, either he or

the Bar could move to have

Musslewhite's license revoked.

Sales said that if news reports from

Scotland prove to be true, then "in

retrospect" the Bar's settlement with

Musslewhite was "too lenient." Sales

said he has ordered Peterson and first

assistant general counsel Steven Smoot

to "marshall all the evidence we can"

for the Sept. 19 hearing.

If the evidence shows Musslewhite

violated the terms of his suspension

and probation, Sales said, you can bet

your sweet bippy” the Bar will move to

ask for punishment stronger than the

Bar's settlement agreement.

Under the terms of Judge Casseb's

settlement order, Musslewhite cannot

accept any new clients before the

suspension starts Nov. l.

MY Sh EK tt Ae

APPENDIX I-26

(Excerpts from)

THE NATIONAL LAW JOURNAL

August 8, 1988

North Sea Visit Spurs

Probe of Texas Lawyer

BY GARY TAYLOR

Special to The National Law Journal

HOUSTON - Alarmed by news reports

from the scene of a North Sea disaster,

the State Bar of Texas has requested an

"unusual" hearing to determine if

attorney Benton Musslewhite has

violated the settlement terms of his

disciplinary dispute.

At the Sept. 19 hearing, the bar

intends to question Mr. Musslewhite

about his activities in the aftermath

of the July 6 Piper Alpha oil rig

explosion that left 166 dead.

"It's an unusual proceeding,” says

Steven Smoot, the bar's first assistant

general counsel. "I've never conducted

one before."

Technically a motion for an oral

hearing, the procedure is filed dns ieee

of the bar's litigation against Mr.

Musslewhite. That disciplinary action

was settled in February, when Mr.

Musslewhite agreed to a 90-day

suspension of his law license.

Mr. Smoot says the Houston solo

practitioner also agreed to accept no

new omplesaent by clients, but he can

refer cases to other attorneys.

Violation of the terms could mean a

three-year suspension or even

Gisbarment for the well-known

litigator, who established his

reputation representing Vietnam

veterans in the Agent Orange cases.

Neither Mr.Musslewhite nor his

attorney, Ray Bass, an Austin solo

practitioner, could be reached for

comment. Both attorneys have said they

‘

believe the agreement allows Mr.

Musslewhite to refer clients to other

lawyers and then work with those

lawyers on the cases. Mr. Musslewhite

has been in Aberdeen, Scotland,

according to the press reports that

captured the state bar's attention.

Those reports described a July 15

news conference during which Mr.

Musslewhite said he would try to have

Piper Alpha lawsuits tried in Texas

courts, where juries give higher

awards. But he also told reporters

that he had redesigned his practice so

his ontptnbion would not interfere with

cases like these.

"We want to hear his explanation,"

says Mr. Smoot. "The judgment speaks

for itself. It says he shall accept no

new employment by clients. We want to

know who is on his team of lawyers."

That team was described in Scottish

newspaper ads and in letters allegedly

drafted by Mr. Musslewhite to attorneys

there. Those letters boast about the

creation of a team of attorneys

experienced in handling cases from mass

disasters.

At his press conference, Mr.

Musslewhite told reporters he was

meeting with Scottish solicitors to

discuss the Piper Alpha litigation

potential, which could total $1 billion

worth of liability. He said he'd been

invited to work on the cases by Glasgow

attorneys. In subsequent newspaper

interviews he “lashed out" at reports

that he had been contacting families

about possible cases.

Mr. Musslewhite first attracted the

Texas bar's disciplinary attention when

it launched an investigation into

solicitation of lawsuits and the use of

‘

runners - or non-lawyers - to enlist

victims of disasters. He was one of

several attorneys accused of the

practice by the bar. (NLJ, 6-8-87.)

The bar says it also wants to

question Mr. Musslewhite about a

lawsuit filed by him June 23 in

Beaumont for an Agent Orange victim.

Mr. Musslewhite has said that the

Beaumont suit does not involve new

clients.

ieee

ih WA ee ey eee oe ee

}

mm he H&S a

APPENDIX I-27

Texas Lawyer

September 26, 1988

‘Excerpts from)

MUSSLEWHITE DEFENDS OVERSEAS WORK

Disciplined Lawyer Says _He Planned

Referrals To O’Guinn

By Richard Connelly

Houston attorney Benton Musslewhite,

prevented from taking new cases because

of previous unethical solicitation

charges, told a district judge Sept. 29

that he and an associate went a

Scotland after a July 6 oil rig

oun and hired a public relations

representative, held 3 press

conference, wrote to two dozen Scottish

solicitors and sent a mass mailing to

every victim or family involved in the

explosion.

But Musslewhite, a prominent solo

practitioner, told visiting Judge

Solomon Casseb, Jr. that he did not

violate probation terms barring him

since Feb. 1 from taking on new

clients. Instead, he testified, he was

plianning to refer any cases to Houston

attorney John O’Quinn, another big-name

personal injury lawyer facing unethical

solicitation charges.

"I told (O’Quinn], “You know I can’t

accept cases, but would you accept

referrals?’ and he said he would,”

Musslewhite testified. Definite

financial arrangenents vere not

Giscussed, he said.

Musslewhite also stressed that, even

with the press conference and mailings

to victinge, there was no direct

solicitation of prospective clients.

“I said at the press conference that we

agreed that the victims should not

Girectly hire American lawyers and we

would only take cases through Scottish

solicitors,” he said.

Musslewhite, working with Houston

solo practitioner Kelly Newman,

never did get any cases from the Piper

Alpha disaster, which claimed 166

lives. But his actions have triggered

a State Bar effort to revoke his

probation, in a hearing scheduled to

continue Oct. 17.

Musslewhite had been charged with

unethical solicitation and ignoring

clients. He said at the time of the

agreement that he was not guilty but

accepted the terms in order “to get on

with Chis] practice”.

In addition to the Pipe Alpha

activities, the Bar’s petition cited @

June 22 press conference in Washington,

D.C., where Musslewhite announced his

involvement in new Agent Orange

litigation.

But it is the activities in Scotland

that most concern the Bar. First,

eesistant general counsel Steven Smoot

showed « videotape of Scottish

television news’ coverage of the July

1S press conference, which included a

reporter’s references to “the Bhopal

Gang” and said, “The U.S. lawyers deny

they are ambulance chasers”.

Coverage in the Scottish media grew

worse after someone, probably another

attorney, made reporters aware of

Musslewhite’s disciplinary troubles in

Texas, court documents said. News of

the press conference reached the U.S.

causing Bar officials to launch their

investigation.

Musslewhite,., who represented himself

at the hearing, seid he did not get

involved with the Piper Alphe case

until three days after the explosion.

He said he returned home from vacation

and found letters from a Scottish

solicitor he was working with on an

unrelated case.

‘

EEE

Musslewhite said he called him about

j that case and the solicitor

“volunteered that he had two cases from

the Piper Alpha case and I expressed

the belief there was a good chance

those cases could be heard in Texas,”

Musslewhite said. He said he already

possessed a ticket to England for an

unrelated matter, but offered to move

the trip up two days to meet with the

Scottish solicitor.

Musslewhite complained during the

hearing that Hampton, whose fees he is

paying as part of the probation

agreement, was not acting objectively,

as a special master should.

“It’s a matter of ne paying for

someone to investigate nme and prosecute

me.” he said, adding the Bar should

pay Hampton.

APPENDIX I-28

The Houston Post

October 18, 1988

‘Excerpts from)

MUSSLEWHITE DISCIPLINARY HEARING BEGINS

By Brenda Sapino

An attorney for the state bar, which

has alleged Houston personal injury

lawyer Benton Musslewhite violated his

disciplinary probation, said Monday he

has no evidence Musslewhite directly

contacted accident victims in Scotland.

Steven Smoot, legal counsel for the

State Bar of Texas, said he has no

evidence that Musslewhite ever

contacted any victim or relative of a

victim of the July 6 Piper Alpha oil

platform rig explosion in the North

Sea.

Smoot testified Monday during a

hearing on the bar’s request for

visiting state District Judge Solomon

Casseb Jr. to revoke Musslewhite’s

disciplinary probation, an action that

could prevent Musslewhite from

practicing law for longer than a 90-day

suspension set to begin Nov. 1.

The bar alleges that Musslewhite may

have violated the terms of his

probation when he went to Scotland to

meet with solicitors.

Musslewhite said he had an

arrangement to refer any litigation to

Houston attorney John O’Quinn.

APPENDIX I-29

Houston Post

July 11, 1989

(Excerpt from)

LAWYER RECEIVES REPRIMAND IN

SETTLEMENT OF STATE BAR SUIT

By John Mecklin

| Prominent personal-injury attorney

John M. O'Quinn received a public

reprimand but no serious sanctions in

the settlement of a widely publicized

disciplinary lawsuit filed against him

by the State Bar of Texas.

In an emotional interview Monday

O'Quinn said he had been unfairly

"dragged through the mud" during the

bar's investigation and lawsuit, which

were the subject of numerous news

reports over a~period of months.

"I'd like to say this: I think it

was wrong for them (the bar and its

attorneys) to try me in the press. I

think a lot of things were said about

me that were false -- not think, I know

(they were false)".

But the settlement's relatively mild

disciplinary action contrasts sharply

with early allegations by an attorney

and a private investigator hired by the

bar of widespread wrongdoing by

O'Quinn.

From the start, the bar's

investigation, which began in 1986, was

surrounded by controversy.

The bar's board of directors took

the unusual step of hiring Tom

Alexander, also a prominent civil

attorney in Houston, as a special

prosecutor. Alexander inturn hired

private investigator Clyde Wilson to

pursue the investigation.

But then the State Supreme Court,

which controls the bar's budget,

refused to pay Alexander's $250,000 fee

because there was no precedent for it.

. . 2

} 5 ‘

And was details of Wilson's

investigation began to leak into the

press, some disgruntled bar officials

publicly referred to Alexander as a

"runaway prosecutor." They charged

Alexander's investigation wa'> being

backed "vigilante" groups seeking to

punish a prominent personal injury

lawyer.

Alexander said, “I sincerely hope

that this public reprimand and

probation will deter others from the

same sort of activity."

Still, Alexander added, "It's a

wrist-slap."

David Berg, one in a team of

attorneys who represented. O'Quinn,

retorted. "To the extent that the case

was tried in the press by Tom

Alexander, I think he (O'Quinn) has

been punished quite enough, thank

you."

Most recently, O'Quinn won a

judgment of at least $600 million from

Tenneco for an Ohio gas producer.

Among numerous other multimillion-

dollar cases, O'Quinn also was a member

of the legal team that negotiated a

$250 million settlement of the Agent

Orange suit on behalf of Vietnam

veterans.

APPENDIX I-30

Texas Lawyer

July 190, 1969

‘Excerpts from)

O’OGUINN BATTLES NEARING AN END

Truce With Bar Called a Matter of

* Economics *_

By Mark Ballard and Robert Elder Jr

The legal cloud over John M. O’ Guinn

began evaporating when the ncted

Houston trial lawyer accepted ”

proposed settlement of his disbarment

suit and the key witness in @ jury

tampering case recanted his

allegations.

O’Guinn will not lose one day of

practice under the deal, whach hed not

been finalized by press time on July 6&6.

But the Stete Bar of Texas board of

directors on June 29 reportedly rebuked

ite general counsel, Steven D. a

Peterson, for his handlinsc of Texas’

most celebrated disbarment suit.

Two members of the Bar’s Grievance

Committee 4-E said Peterson recommended

a light penalty for O’Guinn because the

Bar could not afford to fight O’Guinn’s

team of renowned lawyers, an outcome

many predicted when the general counsel

took over from @ special prosecutor.

The Bar, which last year defeated

O’Guinn’s constitutional challenge of

the Bar’s anti~barratry rules, clained

in the disciplinary suit that O’Guinn

hecg hired eight “runners” to solicit

more than 100 personal injury clients.

Sometimes the runners dressed like

priests or paramedics and slipped into

hospitals to give prospective clients «

brochure that outlined O’Guinn’s most

famous verdicts, according to court

records.

The chairman of the grievance

Committee thet agreed to settle the

case with O’Guinn, Haerry A. “Red”

Loftus, confirmed July 5S that the deal

- subject to court approval - calls for

O’Guinn to receive two years’ probation

and perform 100 hours of community

service. Loftus, #® name partner in

Houston’s Abramowitz 6&6 Loftus, stepped

down July 1 a8 grievance committee

chairman.

But one of O’Guinn’s defense

lawyers, who~— asked not to be

identified, said he interprets the

penalty to mean that probation lasts

only until the 100 hours of community

service is completed, and O’Guinn has

two years to complete it.

Saying that Bar rules forbic him

from commenting on grievance committee

deliberations, Loftus confirmed the

panel was motivated in part by lack of

evidence and escalating costs.

Two other members of the grievance

a ee ee er mee ee ee ee ree eee

committee, both speaking on the

condition of anonymity, said the

documentary evidence against O’Guinn

contained what one member called

“significant gaps.” Plus, several key

witnesses could no longer be located,

the committee member said.

When Loftus presented the final

draft of the settlement at its June 22

meeting, the grievance committee

considered Peterson’s assessment that

the O’Guinn case would be difficult to

win, the sources said.

“We were made to feel that we were

somewhat handicapped in making the case

against this guy (O’Guinn]),.” said one

committee member.

Peterson had told the committee that

C’Ouinn had spent about 63 million on

the case and that the Bar had spent up

to 870,000, the two sources saic.

“Steve told us, “I’1ll do what you

@ll say but this guy can outspend the

— —_EE ia set ae lOrETlUPrlUCU TLlUCUCrreDlUClC rlUCU erlCU rlCU lO ean

—

Bar and I’m facing (five] high-powered

attorneys,” the panelist said.

“The bottom line is that it just

came down to economics, agreed the

other grievance committee member. “We

more or less compromised. And rather

than risk losing the whole case, at

least with a probated sentence we

could hold it over his head for a

while.”

The fallout over the settlement also

played a large part in an unusual

display of dissatisfaction with

Peterson by Bar leaders.

At its June 29 meeting, the Bar’s

board of directors voted to give its

top two executives, Peterson and

executive Director Larry K. Montgomery,

relatively modest raises.

And at least two of the directors

who voted for the raise said the issue

upsetting some directors was the

O’Quinn case and Peterason’s role in the

settlement.

“It’s got a lot to do with it,” said

one member who approved the raise.

“In effect, O’Quinn has beaten the

system,” said William Key Wilde, who

chaired the Bar committee that oversees

the general counsel’s office and

initiated the O’Quinn prosecution in

late 19866. At the time, Wilde, a

Houston partner at Bracewell &

Patterson, favored hiring a special

prosecutor to handle the case.

“This (the settlement] was the sort

of thing that we suspected would have

happened all along”, Wilde said July 6.

“We never felt Steve Petercen was a

match for the lecal team O’Quinn was

able to put together.”

O’Guinn got a better deal than

Peterson offered in January 1987,

rr Ta a a oe oT Tr oe llr CC

Steel

ET ae

when the Bar was considering whether to

hire a special prosecutor. Wilde said.

At that time, O’GQuinn had agreed to

a public reprimand and to testify

against Houston solo practitioners

Benton Musslewhite and Newton 8B.

Schwartz, two other lawyers then facing

disciplinary suits, Wilde said. But.

the grievance committee, which had

different members then, refused to

approve that deal, he said.

“It seems to me ironic that Steve

Peterson would say it was too expensive

when Tom Alexander agreed to do this

for free.” Wilde said.

Alexander, a name partner at

Alexander & McEvily of Houston,

supervised the case for 190 months

before the Bar board of directors fired

him as special prosecutor in October

1987. Peterson retook control of the

case at that point.

Not surprisingly, Alexander also was

critical of the pending deal in

O’Quinn’s case.

“To say that the State Bar cannot

afford to prosecute John O’Quinn is to

say the State Bar is pretty weak and

maybe it does need legislative

supervision.” Alexander said July S.

The settlement “really makes a mockery

of the State Bar rules.”

=— fs a

APPENDIX I-31

Texas Lawyer

August 14¢, 1989

(Excerpts from)

SCHWARTZ ACCEPTS 2-MONTH

SUSPENSION IN SETTLEMENT

By Richard Connelly

Houston solo practitioner Newton

Schwartz has accepted a two-month

suspension and a public reprimand to

end the disciplinary Suit brought

against him by the State Bar, court

documents show.

Schwartz, s prominent personal

injury plaintiffs’ lawyer accused of

mishandling client funds and improperly

financing litigation, finishes his

suspension Aug. 30. The order

containing the agreement was signed by

visiting Judge Solomon Casseb of San

Antonio on June 27.

The charges against Schwartz came

YV-

cut of the high-profile “Masters of

Disaster” investigation begun by the

Bar in 1986. Although the

investigation centered on personal

injury lawyers accused ef hiring

runners to solicit cases from accident

victims, Schwartz however was never

charged with improper solicitation.

With Schwartz’ settlement, the three

disciplinaryvy suits filed in the

investigation have come to an end.

Houston attorney John O’Quinn’s case

garnered the most attention, because of

his string of multi-million dollar

verdicts, his star-studded defense

team and his failed constitutional

challenge to the Bar’s anti-

solicitation rules. O’Quinn, named

partner in Houston’s O’Quinn, Kerensky

& McAninch, settied his suit June 30 by.

agreeing to a public reprimand, 100

hours of community service and

reimbursement of $38,000 to the State

Bar for investigatory expenses.

The harshest penalty went to Houston

solo practitioner Benton Musslewhite,

like O’Quinn, accused of hiring

runners. Musslewhite, who was also

accused of fee-sharing and ignoring

cases, initially settled his case Feb.

1, 1988, with a 90-day suspension to

begin in November of that year. He was

to take ‘on ‘no new clients before the

suspension started, according to the

agreement.

Nine months later, however, Casseb

ruled Musslewhite had violated his

parole and ordered three-year

suspension. The suspension has begun,

although Musslewhite is fighting the

ruling in federal court.

Casseb’a order came. after

Musslewhite traveled to Scotland in the

wake of an cil rig disaster.

Musslewhite claimed he was conferring

with Scottish solicitors and planned to

refer all cases to O’GQuinn, but Bar

officials said his actions violated

his parole condition barring new

business.

Schwartz, Musslewhite and O’Guinn

were menbers of the pliseintififs’

management committee in the Agent

Orange litigation of the mid-1960s.

Schwartz and O’OQuinn also were among

the plaintiffs’ lawyers who helped

finance the massive, multi-district

case that blamed chemical manufacturers

for the ailments suffered by Vietnasm

veterans who came in contect with the

toxic defoliant.

nlp

eS ee ee a

a we Te ere a — SS —- Sl ele! ~s - — wet”? |

APPENDIX I-32

Houston Post

May 10, 1984

‘Excerpts from)

CITY LAWYER HERO IN AGENT ORANGE

The document that changed Houston

lawyer, Benton Musslewhite’s life--

and now will affect the lives of

possibly as many as 100,000 Vietnan

veterans a8 a result -- was @ meno

concerning sa i965 meeting between

representatives of seven chemical

companies.

The gist of the memo, Musslewhite

reasons, was that those seven chemical

companies had realized the defoliant

Agent Orange they were producing for

the U.S. government contained dioxin,

one of the most toxic substances known

to man.

What caught his attention was that

those representatives decided not to

|i i a a

tell the Pentagon what they had

learned.

As @ result, seven more years passed

before the government halted the

Spraying of Vietnamese jungles with

millions of gallons of the chemical.

“I just said, ‘I can’t believe it. I

can’t believe anyone would do this,

would allow that to continue knowing

what they did,” and I just couldn’t say

no once I knew that.” he said.

Musslewhite called the lawyer for

the veterans group Citizen Soldier in

New York City back and agreed to accept

calls from veterans who believed the

illnesses they suffered stemmed from

Agent Orange.

On Sunday, Musslewhite and seven

other lawyers acting ae a master

committee negotiated the largest

settlement in a products liability case

in this nation’s history -- one that

could bring those veterans as much as

S750 million.

Without Musslewhite, though, sources

close to those negotiations and even

some committee members readily concede,

those veterans might never have gotten

a penny.

“Musslewhite has definitely vceen one

of the most active and most involved in

the case.” said Houston lawyer John

O’ Quinn, another member of the

committee.

“Benton has persevered. He all

along has been one of the three that

has kept the ship afloat,” conceded

Newton Schwartz, the other Texas

attorney on the panel. “That has been

his role through thick and thin.”

It was Musslewhite who organized

1,500 veterans -- including almost 400

Texans -- and filed -their claims. It

was Musslewhite who argued strategy

with a group of New York and Rhode

Island lawyers originally assigned to

monitor claims from across the nation.

It was Musslewhite who recruited

O’Quinn and Sitdaiaeee and the money they

had available to the eight-member panel

when the original group of New England

lawyers almost gave up.

O’GQuinn -- by his own estimate--

has contributed #6300,900 to 8s400,000

excluding his own time. Schwartz says

he has tossed in #6150,000 cash and up

to a quarter of amillion in time and

research.

“Benton has probably worked on this

himself for 5,000 ofr 6,000 hours,

almost steady on it for four years,”

Schwartz said.

Musslewhite estimates $his own

contribution at almost a quarter of a

million dollars -- so much that rent on

his own law office in the 609 Fannin

Building is “a few months behind,” he

says.

He doesn’t own a home and is still

$3 million in debt by his own estimate.

Benton Musslewhite was hardly the

man to take on bint massive chemical

companies or the federal government.

He holds law degrees from Southern

Methodist University and Georgetown

University and was licensed in April

195¢. He worked in a Dallas firm, then

two years for judge advocate general’s

corps at the Pentagon and later

practiced in Lufkin with his father.

As an active Democrat at one tine,

he lost a congressional seat in 1962 by

41 votes after being tagged a liberal.

He lost the same seat by 11,000 votes

in a second outing four years later.

Sen. Ralph Yarborough then made him

his legislative assistant. But when

Yarborough left office two years later,

Musslewhite moved to Houston and began

pursuing real estate ventures and

taking personal injury cases.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.