.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Proviso Probe

Tuesday, October 11, 2005

ARDC, letter to Nyberg [D209]

I received this letter today.
Initially, please understand that the duties of this Commission relate solely to investigating and prosecuting allegations of professional misconduct against Illinois attorneys. When we have sufficient evidence of misconduct, we may initiate proceedings seeking disciplinary action against the attorney, such as disbarment or suspension from the practice of law. We have no authority to intervene in or impact any factual disputes arising between parties. The merit and the veracity of Mr. Welch’s lawsuit are issues for a court of law to determine, rather than this agency. Thus, we can make no determination as to the merits of civil claims, including any claim made against you for defamation.

For the above reasons, we have determined that you have provided no new information that would change our previous decision with respect to your allegations of misconduct against Mr. Welch. Accordingly, our file will remain closed.

Finally, please be advised that Supreme Court Rules do not provide for an appeal from the Administrator’s decision not to initiate disciplinary proceedings. However, we will always review whatever communications you send to us. If you wish to provide additional information that you believe shows misconduct by Mr. Welsh [sic], please direct all such correspondence to the undersigned. Also, If [sic] you do not hear from us in response to one of your communications, it is because we have determined that a response is unwarranted, and you should assume we are taking no action.

Very truly yours,

Myrrha B. Guzman
Counsel

It would be easier to believe Ms. Guzman was carefully considering the allegations if she was able to produce a letter without multiple typos. (See Guzman's earlier typos here.) But since the ARDC isn't really accountable to anyone, it doesn't really matter to them if they get an individual case right.

Michael Manzo has told me of his disatisfaction with the ARDC. Anybody else have feedback on the ARDC?

4 Comments:

  • I was hoping it wasn't true, but it appears Myrrha Guzman is formerly of Citizen Advcocacy Center.

    I've met her, but never really worked with her when she was there.

    By Blogger Carl Nyberg, at 2:46 PM, October 12, 2005  

  • We are very disappointed in the justice system of Illinois, especially with the ARDC and the decision Myrrha B. Guzman made in our case. We have been told all of are lives that there are "two sides" to any story. If we had known our case was going to be pasted on from the ARDC attorney that was handling our case and had all of our evidence "27 pages" to another attorney who viewed it totally one-sided we, would have not wasted our time. The least she could have did was to just look at our side of the story. Or, did our side matter? We are African's and the ARDC let us know that there is no difference between the years 1865 and 2005. Everytime those corrupt law-breakers at the ARDC deny American born citizens the right of vindication and restitution our children and grand-children are in grave danger of this becoming a third world country.


    Sincerely,

    CHARLES D. CHERRY II

    By Blogger CHARLES D. CHERRY II, at 10:56 PM, October 30, 2005  

  • Myrrha B. Guzman did not dismiss a lawyer who basically had knowledge that his client tried to kill her step-son who was a 50% heir in a probate case. It appears someone needs to investigate her.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:26 AM, January 18, 2008  

  • MY WIFE AND I ARE ALSO VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH THE ARDC AND THEIR UNBELIEVABLE STANCE...THE FINAL LETTER WRITTEN BY KARYN LAABS CLAIMED THAT THERE IS NO SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR FURTHER ACTION BY THIS COMMISION.

    I RESPONDED TO THE ATTORNEY'S RESPONCE OF MY COMPLAINT POINTING OUT SEVERAL LIES IN HIS RESPONCE. THESE WERE NOT JUST CLAIMS BY ME I HAD PHONE RECORDS AND FAX RECORDS TO SUPPORT THESE CLAIMS. I CALLED MS. LAABS THINKING MAYBE SHE DIDN'T GET MY RESPONCE (SHE DID).

    SHE CLAIMED THIS WAS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO GO IN FRONT OF A JUDGE WITH. I DID NOT REALIZE THAT IT TOOK A JUDGE TO MAKE THIS DECISION.
    THE BOTTOM LINE IS MY ATTORNEY'S LIES AND INCOMPETENCE COST MY WIFE AND I MORE THAN 12000.00.

    EVIDENTLY THE ILLINOIS ARDC IS ONLY THERE TO SERVE ATTORNEYS AND THEIR NEEDS. THEY CLAIM TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC FROM THESE TYPE OF ATTORNEYS..WHAT A WASTE!!!!!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:51 PM, February 28, 2008  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home