Because We Said So

As I have said before, the proposed rules have been vetted by the State Bar Disciplinary Rules Committee, the Supreme Court Task Force, the Board of Directors and the Supreme Court itself. To suggest that the final result is a product as flawed as the critics would have you believe is just a bit disingenuous. I hope you will study the proposed rules and make your own decision.

That’s Lubbock Lawyer Ralph Brock’s in favor of the proposed amendments to the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct.

Do you trust the State Bar Disciplinary Rules Committee to have your clients’ best interests at heart?

Do you trust the Supreme Court Task Force to have your clients’ best interests at heart?

Do you trust the Board of Directors to have your clients’ best interests at heart?

Do you trust the Supreme Court of Texas to have your clients’ best interests at heart? (Have the rules really been “vetted by the Supreme Court itself”? or is “The Court’s approval of this referendum … not a predetermination of any legal issues regarding the proposed rules“?)

If you trust any of them and you have clients, I can tell you what sort of clients you represent: corporations.

If you don’t trust any one of those august organizations to have your clients’ best interests at heart, you’ve got no reason to trust them all together. And if you don’t trust them all together, it’s not the least bit disingenuous to suggest that the final product is flawed. Brock’s argument to the contrary is an argument from authority, which is a logical fallacy.

Study the proposed rules and make your decision. In doing so consider that the State Bar is trying to manipulate you, both in the form of its ballot and in its propaganda push. Consider also that the form of the ballot is unlawful. And tell the State Bar of Texas with your vote that if they want you to approve an amendment to a rule, they can poll you on that amendment like the Legislature intended, without trying to make you agree on other amendments at the same time.

3 responses to “Because We Said So”

  1. The Ralph Brock I knew back when I was in Lubbock was more skeptical (though still more of a bar insider than I thought made sense). Sorry to see he’s gone to the dark side on this one.

  2. Jeff,

    The lawyer you are probably thinking of was the elder Ralph Brock, who is now deceased, and by all accounts, he was indeed skeptical (and I dare say would have disagreed with his nephew regarding the value of this referendum).

  3. Rusty,

    Sorry to hear that the elder is now deceased (though he’d be mighty old by now if he weren’t. But I actually thought it was the younger. Less wary than his uncle, and even then (I left Lubbock more than 20 years ago) too much a part of the establishment bar, the younger Ralph was, at least then, somewhat warier. On the other hand, I noticed in the latest Texas Bar Journal that he’s a formal endorser of the proposal and was a member of the Committee or some such, which makes the endorsement itself less than the seemingly objective and disinterested view it’s presented as.


Leave a Reply to Rusty Gunter Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.