AG Bysiewicz: Blessing in Disguise?
We all know that Bysiewicz admitted, publicly, on the record, that she does not have ten years of experience practicing law as the Connecticut Constitution requires to be attorney general.
What does that mean?
If she’s not qualified to represent the state, the state has NO counsel. That’s open season on the state.
That’s also open season to litigate against the state, undisputed. Whether it’s the income tax, the citizen’s election program, DCF or whatever you may have a problem with, stock up on paper, ink and law books.
A Bysiewicz victory would allow us to literally sue large state government out of existence. It’s the only Democratic victory I look forward to.
lol..
Is this for real? Wow, she’s got my vote if this is a real possibility..
I’ve heard that she was “technically” unqualified for the office. Can you share details of how this might actually unfold?
1Ten is the magic number of years practicing law. But when it was time to renew her license, she admitted on the application that she wasn’t practicing during the time she was Secretary of State. That brought her below ten years of practice. While she argues that being Secretary of State counts toward that requirement, it’s not practicing law.
So regardless, she gets elected. Someone sues in federal court on constitutional grounds to remove Program X. It’s really a matter of a simple objection with a reference to the state constitution that the state doesn’t have qualified counsel, and the burden of proof would be on her.
2Here is a very interesting blog directly addressing this. She feels that she is totally in the right but only a direct legal challenge would resolve this as it comes down to interpretation of the way the law and requirements are stated.
http://aconnecticutlawblog.com/2010/01/a-few-thoughts-and-an-invitation-to-susan-bysiewicz/
http://aconnecticutlawblog.com/2010/01/susan-bysiewicz-responds/
3The statute that requires an attorney general to be “an attorney with at least 10 years’ active practice at the bar of this state”
She has 6
Isn’t she violating state law and campaign election rules by making this inquiry an state letterhead (and assumably) on state time? And she wants to be AG? Come off it lady!
Just another example of why not to vote Democratic.
4I’ll have to look into that Chief. For now, I have to find out how busy her other elections violations may be this time around.
5My guess is that they’ll take the stance that if her candidacy isn’t successfully challenged the voters authorize her to fill the position. She’ll also have plenty of assistant AG’s who can try cases and could likely file on her behalf. Dem’s just like making the rest of us follow the rules, especially one’s they won’t follow themselves.
6It’s going to be great fun when we get into those assistant AG’s.
For example, Sec. 3-125. Duties of Attorney General; deputy; assistants; associate attorneys general. This is a list of things that can’t happen –
“Attorney General shall appoint a deputy, who shall be sworn to the faithful discharge of his duties and shall perform all the duties of the Attorney General in case of his sickness or absence.”
“He shall appear for the state, the Governor, the Lieutenant Governor, the Secretary, the Treasurer and the Comptroller, and for all heads of departments and state boards, commissioners, agents, inspectors, committees, auditors, chemists, directors, harbor masters, and institutions and for the State Librarian in all suits and other civil proceedings, except upon criminal recognizances and bail bonds, in which the state is a party or is interested, or in which the official acts and doings of said officers are called in question, and for all members of the state House of Representatives and the state Senate in all suits and other civil proceedings brought against them involving their official acts and doings in the discharge of their duties as legislators, in any court or other tribunal, as the duties of his office require; and all such suits shall be conducted by him or under his direction.”
Note the field day we could have with, “for all members of the state House of Representatives and the state Senate in all suits and other civil proceedings brought against them involving their official acts and doings in the discharge of their duties as legislators”
“All legal services required by such officers and boards in matters relating to their official duties shall be performed by the Attorney General or under his direction.”
“All suits or other proceedings by such officers shall be brought by the Attorney General or under his direction.”
And here’s another hole big enough to drive a truck through –
“Sec. 3-128. Signature machines. The Attorney General may authorize the use of a signature machine by any officer or department of the state for the purpose of attaching signatures to any warrant, order or check in connection with the disbursement of money in behalf of the state.”
Needless to say, this also requires an AG –
“Sec. 3-131. Annual reports. The Attorney General shall prepare and submit to the Governor a report of the doings of his office in accordance with the provisions of section 4-60 and shall account to the State Treasurer for all fees, bills of costs and moneys received and expended by him by virtue of his office.”
Show me Bysiewicz winning the election, and I’ll show you a headless chicken.
And while we’re having fun here, there’s a bond to go after –
“Sec. 3-124. Election; qualifications; salary; bond. Office of Attorney General full time. There shall be an Attorney General to be elected in the same manner as other state officers in accordance with the provisions of section 9-181. The Attorney General shall be an elector of this state and an attorney at law of at least ten years’ active practice at the bar of this state. The office of the Attorney General shall be at the Capitol. The Attorney General shall receive an annual salary of one hundred ten thousand dollars. The Attorney General shall devote full time to the duties of the office and shall give bond in the sum of ten thousand dollars.”
7Dan,
Simply put, I don’t think she should be allowed to run as she doesn’t appear to meet the simple requirements for the position. With that said, I don’t have any doubt the requirements will be spun so that she is said to be qualified. Once in office, all bets are off and I’m sure the “by direction” clause of many of these responsibilities. I don’t have any doubt that all this will be subject to reinterpretation should she win the office. Regardless of the requirements, if she were to be elected, they will say she’s the people’s choice for AG and as such will do the job. It isn’t right, and I certainly hope someone gets a complaint filed to ensure the courts rule on this long before the election.
8Let’s dissect the response of Bysiewicz here –
http://aconnecticutlawblog.com/2010/01/susan-bysiewicz-responds/
Her broad definition of practicing law is –
“For over twenty years, I have been honored to actively practice law in Connecticut as a member in good standing of the Connecticut bar. My strong and diverse legal qualifications include 8 years in private practice, and 16 years in public service as an attorney, first as a state legislator and later, as Secretary of the State. [Dan Reale editorial - stop parsing the question already] There is no legal basis to conclude that “active practice at the bar of this state” excludes those attorneys who are practicing in the public or corporate arenas. To interpret “active practice” to mean only private practice would be a mistake.” [Dan Reale editorial - stop parsing the question already, again, please. No one made the distinction between public and private practice but you.]
“Over the years I have made all filings and paid fees consistent with the filings and fees paid by other practicing attorneys in the state, including the client security fund payment and the attorney occupational tax return. I am also registered on the State of CT Judicial web site as an active attorney in the State.”
“This makes me eligible for the office of Attorney General. Furthermore, please review the definition of the “practice of law” in the Connecticut Practice Book, which governs attorney conduct in the state which demonstrates that, in my service as Secretary of the State, I am clearly practicing law. The relevant section is: Sec. 2-44A(a)(2), which includes as “practice of law”:”
“Giving advice or counsel to persons concerning or with respect to their legal rights or responsibilities or with regard to any matter involving the application of legal principles to rights, duties, obligations or liabilities.”
To review that interpetation of Sec. 2-44A(a)(2) of the general practice book – So effectively, every postal employee advising you that sending nuclear materials in the mail is also “practicing law”. So is every justice of the peace informing those he or she is about to marry on what they need to be married. So is every police officer explaining the nature and contents of a traffic ticket.
So let’s go back to the admissions on the record that she was not practicing, then consult this –
“Sec. 51-88. Practice of law by persons not attorneys. (a) A person who has not been admitted as an attorney under the provisions of section 51-80 shall not: (1) Practice law or appear as an attorney-at-law for another, in any court of record in this state, (2) make it a business to practice law, or appear as an attorney-at-law for another in any such court, (3) make it a business to solicit employment for an attorney-at-law, (4) hold himself out to the public as being entitled to practice law, (5) assume to be an attorney-at-law, (6) assume, use or advertise the title of lawyer, attorney and counselor-at-law, attorney-at-law, counselor-at-law, attorney, counselor, attorney and counselor, or an equivalent term, in such manner as to convey the impression that he is a legal practitioner of law, or (7) advertise that he, either alone or with others, owns, conducts or maintains a law office, or office or place of business of any kind for the practice of law.”
This governs admission to practice –
“Sec. 51-80. Admission. The Superior Court may admit and cause to be sworn as attorneys such persons as are qualified therefor, in accordance with the rules established by the judges of the Superior Court. The judges of the Superior Court may establish rules relative to the admission, qualifications, practice and removal of attorneys.”
So even if she was admitted, at one point, she did not seek readmission to fix this little problem –
“The Hartford Courant reported on January 28 that Bysiewicz had filed a form with the Connecticut Judicial Department in 2006, 2007 and 2008 stating that she did “not engage in the practice of law as an occupation” which enabled her to pay 50% of the customary professional fee to the Client Security Fund. She has since withdrawn that documentation and paid the additional $55 for 2006 to rectify her “mistake.” For 2007 and 2008 respectively, Bysiewicz’s office sent in the full fee of $110, although the same form stating “I do not engage in the practice of law as an occupation” was completed and signed.” (http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/02/02/another-usurper/)
Remember that she was “registered as an active attorney”? The question is “how?”
And from the same source, this little gem slices away another two years of practice in the right state –
“The position of attorney general was authorized by statute in Connecticut in 1897 and reads: “The attorney-general shall be an elector of this state, and an attorney-at-law of at least ten years’ active practice at the bar of this state.” Ms. Bysiewicz worked in private practice of law in Connecticut from 1988 to 1994 and has two years of active practice in the state of New York.”
9The simple fact here is that she appears to believe she is qualified. Unless someone files a complaint, I’d be willing to bet she says on the ticket.
10This is true Ray. This is true. To stop this before the election, we need a candidate for AG willing to challenge her. Otherwise, we won’t have someone with standing to make the challenge.
11“A Bysiewicz victory would allow us to literally sue large state government out of existence. It’s the only Democratic victory I look forward to”.
Well she has my vote then!
12