Violation of Attorney Client Privilege
From a Florida Bar Complaint Filed by Don Juravin Against Marc Randazza
On October 20th, 2016 Marc Randazza maliciously entered into private privileged communication with Mr. Juravin and induced Mr. Juravin to share confidential and personal information regarding Mr. Juravin’s personal affairs, business strategies and tactics for litigation. Mr. Juravin paid two hundred and fifty ($250) for a thirty- minute conversation with Mr. Randazza. The ensuing email correspondence [exhibit F] between the two of them indicate a familiarity and camaraderie which Mr. Randazza gave a false sense of security that any disclosure or continued conversation would be covered by attorney client privilege. He even undertook to negotiate the terms of the representations. He boasted about his handling of the current case that he was handling against Roca Labs to serve as justification for the outrageous fees which he commanded.
In general, the attorney-client privilege prevents attorneys from revealing information provided to them by their clients. It usually prevents other parties from compelling a lawyer to disclose this information as well. In most situations, the privilege also extends to communications between a prospective client and an attorney. For the privilege to apply, a client or a prospective client must be seeking legal advice from the attorney. They must intend the communication to be private, as shown by the circumstances. The attorney must be acting in a professional role, rather than simply discussing the client’s situation with them as a friend.
Most of the duties flowing from the client-lawyer relationship attach only after the client has requested the lawyer to render legal services and the lawyer has agreed to do so. But there are some duties, for example confidentiality under rule 4-1.6, which attach when the lawyer agrees to consider whether a client-lawyer relationship will be established. Rule 4-1.18.
Per the communications between them, it is clear that Mr. Juravin was seeking legal advice and would never disclosed anything to Mr. Randazza that would be adverse to his interests in the future unless he believed that the attorney client privilege would protect him. Not protecting his interests here would be tantamount to a direct blow and dismantling of the faith that public repose on the reliance of the state bar to regulate and enforce the attorney client privilege on their behalf.
Mr. Randazza breached his duty not to disclose the privileged information shared with him by Mr. Randazza during the course of their communication. This is a direct violation of the Florida ethical rules. The Florida bar must hold him accountable for such breach of trust and serve as notice and deterrence to other attorneys that the sacredness of the attorney client privilege will be upheld and the public trust in the attorney client privilege will be safeguarded.
Marc Randazza Grievous and Repeated Violations of Florida Bar Ethical Rules and Nevada State Bar Probation Violations
Don Juravin files this Complaint against Marc Randazza based upon egregious misconduct under the ethical rules and personal persecution of Don Juravin under the guise of the law. His improper actions were not authorized or sanctioned by the law and are in direct violation of the Florida Bar Ethical Rules. “The commission by a lawyer of any act that is unlawful or contrary to honesty and justice, whether the act is committed in the course of the attorney's relations as an attorney or otherwise may constitute cause for discipline.” (Florida Bar Rule 3-4.3)
Applicable Florida Bar Rules
4–3.3(a) (“A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal; (2) fail to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client; (3) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or (4) permit any witness, including a criminal defendant, to offer testimony or other evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. A lawyer may not offer testimony that the lawyer knows to be false in the form of a narrative unless so ordered by the tribunal. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and thereafter comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures.”).
4 4–3.4(a) (a lawyer shall not unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence);
4–3.4(b) (a lawyer shall not fabricate evidence); 4–3.4(c) (a lawyer shall not knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal); 4–3.4(d) (a lawyer shall not make a frivolous discovery request or intentionally fail to comply with a legally proper discovery request);
4–8.4(c) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation); and 4–8.4(d) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration of justice).
4-4.4 (a) In representing a client, a lawyer may not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person or knowingly use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person.
Rule 4-8.4 (a-b) A Lawyer shall not: (a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another; (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.
Rule 4-8.4(d) A lawyer shall not. engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration of justice, including to knowingly, or through callous indifference, disparage, humiliate, or discriminate against litigants, jurors, witnesses, court personnel, or other lawyers on any basis, including, but not limited to, on account of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, national origin, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, age, socioeconomic status, employment, or physical characteristic.
Rule 4-1.5 An attorney shall not enter into an agreement for, charge, or collect an illegal, prohibited, or clearly excessive fee or cost, or a fee generated by employment that was obtained through advertising or solicitation not in compliance with the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. A fee or cost is clearly excessive when: (1) after a review of the facts, a lawyer of ordinary prudence would be left with a definite and firm conviction that the fee or the cost exceeds a reasonable fee or cost for services provided to such a degree as to constitute clear overreaching or an unconscionable demand by the attorney; or (2) the fee or cost is sought or secured by the attorney by means of intentional misrepresentation or fraud upon the client.
Rule 4-3.1(A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.