I’m not quite sure what to think about this. Over at My Left Nutmeg, Jon Kantrowitz takes severe exception to the fact that Merrick Alpert has not paid his client security fund fee, and was therefore administratively suspended from the practice of law. It appears the non-payment is intentional on Merrick’s part, though it is not crystal clear (though the preponderance of the evidence weights against him) that he was aware that he was supposed to pay, whether he was practicing or not. The rule is fairly clear that every member of the bar must pay, unless he or she files a formal notice of retirement with the appropriate body, and the quotes from Merrick certainly seem to indicate that he knew he was supposed to pay.
At first blush it appears to be a fairly minor matter. I can certainly see how someone might make the mistake of believing he was exempt from payment if he was no longer practicing. On the other hand, it’s quite likely that anyone in that situation would receive notices from the state telling them of the requirements. In fact, I’m fairly certain it is all spelled out on the bill, when you get it. I don’t normally read it thoroughly, since I just pass it on to our bookkeeping department for payment, but I’m pretty sure the law is cited in it. After all, it’s being sent to lawyers who will presumably be looking for any excuse not to pay. I can certainly understand Kantrowitz’s pique, since he, a non-practicing lawyer for about 30 years, faithfully pays his fee.
In the final analysis, perhaps we must conclude that this merely proves that Merrick is qualified to be a politician in these modern times. Kantrowitz is obviously one of those folks Leona Helmsley called the “little people” who pay their taxes and otherwise play by the rules. Modern day politicians mentally exempt themselves from most of those rules, and Merrick is no exception. He made a decision that he shouldn’t pay what is a relatively nominal amount, because whether or not the rule applied to him, he did not believe it should. Playing by the rules is for the little people, not folks who have been marked out by-well, by themselves in this case, for greater things. It bespeaks a certain arrogance, does it not? But then, arrogance is what Merrick is mostly about.
One Comment