Lawyer suspended for ‘predatory style of taking on client representation’
A Philadelphia lawyer has been suspended for five years after a state disciplinary board concluded that he lacked an “ethical compass” and provided no evidence of “genuine concern for his clients.” (Image from Shutterstock)
A Philadelphia lawyer has been suspended for five years after a state disciplinary board concluded that he lacked an “ethical compass” and provided no evidence of “genuine concern for his clients.”
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court suspended lawyer Joseph D. Lento of Pennsylvania in a Nov. 19 suspension order that accepted the recommendation of a July report by the disciplinary board.
The Legal Profession Blog noted the suspension.
Lento “employed a predatory style of taking on client representation, failing to ascertain whether the client’s goals could be accomplished, and nevertheless accepting legal fees,” according to the July report.
Over a period of 2½ years, Lento entered into “vague fee agreements with clients for legal work that he could not or did not perform through his incompetence, lack of diligence and communication deficiencies,” the report said. He also filed incorrect pleadings and failed to properly manage employees, according to the report.
The report was based on six matters, according to the factual findings.
In one matter, Lento was paid $9,000 to expunge a guilty plea and criminal record for a man who pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct in January 2017. Other misdemeanor charges for marijuana possession, reckless endangerment and drug paraphernalia were dropped. The man said he thought that Lento was going to get everything expunged, and he did not know that he had to wait five years to wipe the disorderly conduct charge from his record. He learned of the wait after he contacted a Dilworth Paxson lawyer.
In a second matter, a lawyer working at Lento’s law firm filed a disability complaint against a restaurant on behalf of a man who uses a wheelchair. When the lawyer left the firm, then known as the Optimum Law Group, he asked Lento to substitute his appearance in any case filed under his name. The lawyer was not aware that the Optimum Law Group had no lawyers admitted to practice in the court where the case was filed. The case was initially dismissed.
In other matters, Lento failed to correct a pro hac vice motion that falsely stated Lento’s disciplinary history; failed to explain to a client that any felony convictions could not be sealed under the Clean Slate Act; and took a fee from a student in a Georgia school-discipline matter, even though he is not licensed there and could only act as an “adviser.”
Lento had argued that the disciplinary counsel failed to meet its burden of proof on some rule violations. The disciplinary board concluded, however, that Lento “engaged in serious professional misconduct.”
Paul Batista, a lawyer representing Lento, told the ABA Journal in an email that he fully expects “to vindicate Mr. Lento’s interests and see to it that he receives the fairness to which he is entitled.”
“While we acknowledge the existence of the Pennsylvania proceedings,” Batista says, “we will vigorously challenge the Pennsylvania proceedings in all relevant venues and any attempts by other jurisdictions to duplicate the procedures utilized by Pennsylvania.
“It is also important to stress that Mr. Lento has never been accused of depriving clients of funds to which Mr. Lento was not entitled. In other words, there was never an accusation that Mr. Lento engaged in any kind of inappropriate or abusive conduct. Mr. Lento at all times provided honest services to thousands of clients whom he represented vigorously and successfully.
“Finally, the punishment of a five-year suspension is, we believe, excessive and utterly disproportionate.”
Batista says Lento “is a pioneer” in the development of a practice to serve men and women victimized by educational institutions.
“Indeed, it is accurate to say that Mr. Lento’s pioneering methods of protecting clients have been expropriated and exploited by other lawyers and law firms that have copied his original, lawful and creative approaches,” Batista says.
