Peter Cannon Case Study

Assignment 8
a)I think the plagiarism is not a victimless crime. Peter Cannon’s brief does not reflect his own opinion but the idea of others. It equivalents to pirating others work for his own gain. Thus, I believe the judge has the right to pursuing discipline action toward this attorney. Also, since the legal brief is the legal document that reviewed and acknowledge by judge. The judge also has the responsibility to verify and validity of the document before accepting it. Therefore, appropriate disciplinary action is required for judge if plagiarized is found.

b)I think the punishment is adequate for this kind of action. First, the original authors of this article have the right to know the plagiarism. The relative record should be kept in court for documenting. The brief’s preparation fee should be disgorged since the attorney uses other work to earn this money. Moreover, the course is necessary to allow the attorney to understand why he should not do this. The most severe punishment is the public reprimand,

From my point of view, it is more like perjury which is an additional offense to the court. Moreover, Lane charged excessive fee which itself is also an offense. Also, the court considered other similar cases that have the same conclusion. Thus, the result penalty of license suspension is adequate.

d)I think this kind of public shaming is not harsh consider the nature of attorney. An attorney represents his or her clients with the trust of both the court and the clients. Thus, the integrity of an attorney should be without question. Though other attorneys might find the disciplinary record, plain public who has little knowledge about legal system might find difficult to do so. Thus, public reprimand is a good way to make this problem known and allow people to choose their attorneys