United States First Circuit

District court's decision admonishing interested party-attorney for unprofessional conduct in his representation of a junior mortgagor related to the sale of the foreclosed property, is affirmed, where: 1) attorney's claim that opposing attorney converted funds was never supported by any evidence; 2) attorney's allegation that opposing attorney violated the criminal usury statute was frivolous; and 3) attorney turned what seemed to be innocent misunderstandings into claims of perjury in his allegations of false statements.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/27/2013
• Published 02/27/2013

Judges

• HOWARD

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel