no comments

ATTORNEY & CLIENT. His first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client,55 and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the letter.56 The office of attorney is indispensable to the administration of justice and is intimate and peculiar in its relation to, and vital to the well-being of, the court.57 An attorney has a duty to aid the court in seeing that actions and proceedings in which he is engaged as counsel are conducted in a dignified and orderly manner, free from passion and personal animosities, and that all causes brought to an issue are tried and decided on their merits only58Duty not looked on lightly. Attorneys as officers of court have duty to maintain respect due court which duty should exceed that imposed upon the public generally and which duty should not be looked upon lightly and cannot be shirked under the guise of representing interest of a party litigant…. Arm of State. As attorney, is an officer of the court and as such an officer and arm of the state (124 F. Supp. 257)…. Nature and duty of obligation. One who is admitted to practice as attorney at law, both by virtue of his oath of office and customs and traditions of the legal profession, owes to the court the highest duty of fidelity (97 N.W. 2d 287; 255 Minn. 370 In re: Lord). Accepting employment entails duty to courts and faithful performance of services. .. Vital Public Interest. The relation of attorney and client is affected by vital public interest…. Letters Patent. Right to practice law is a property right, existing by virtue of letters patent (168 A. 229; 114 N.J. Eq. 68)….  Corpus Juris Secundum 4 (1980). Practicing Attorney. Ability which is greater than that possessed by average citizen…. 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 29 (1980). Accepting employment entails duty to courts and faithful performance of services…. See Note. S.-U.S. v. Frank, D.C.N.J., 53 F. 2d 128, reversed on other grounds Loughlin v. U.S., 57 F. 2d 1080, and reversed on other ground Pearse v. U.S., 59 F. 2d 518-In rb Kelly, D.C. Mont. 243 F. 696; Fla.-Petition of Florida State Bar Ass’n, 186 So. 280, 134 Fla. 851; Neb.- State ex rel. Nebraska State Bar Ass’n v. Jensen, 105 N.W. 2d 459, 171 Neb. 1, certiorari denied 81 S.Ct. 905, 365 U.S. 870, 5 L. ed. 2d 860; N.D.-State v. Stokes, 243 N.W. 2d 372; Wis.-Petition of Board of Law Examiners, Examination of 1928, 210 N.W. 710, 191 Wis. 359. 56Va.-Holt v. Com., 138 S.E. 2d 809, 205 Va., 332, reversed on other grounds 85 S. Ct 1375, 381 U.S. 131, 14 L. Ed 2d 290.-State v. Woodville, 108 So. 309, 161 La. 125 -Hoppe v. Klapperich, 28 N.W. 2d 780, 224 Minn. 224,173 A.L.R. 622.

Note: By definition, the obligations and duties of attorneys are toward the court and the “public” (abstraction of the mind that favors government) never the client. Clients are fodder for the freedom-usurpation and wealth-confiscation activities of the court. Attorneys are there to ensure that the court is well stocked with paying customers. It is a rigged game, with attorneys enjoying many special privileges (such as having their fees enforced by judicial decree, even when they lose) in exchange for shepherding unwitting client-victims into court at the sacrificial judicial altar. Clients are also “wards of the court” and therefore “persons of unsound mind.” See client, wards of court.