Thanks to the following bloggers, and especially to our out-of-state colleagues, for weighing in on the State Bar of Texas’s attempts to amend the Disciplinary Rules and efforts to do away with flat fees:

The State Bar of Texas is conducting an unlawful referendum on amendments to the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. Any rules that pass the referendum will be subject to years of litigation; even if they are ultimately upheld by the courts, they will still be illegitimate.

From Brian Burris of the Council of the General Practice, Solos, and Small Firm Section of the State Bar of Texas, a voluntary section that “devotes its energies primarily to the interests of lawyres who practice as solos and in small firms:

Texas Bar's online ballot for the disciplinary rules referendum.Remember: there is no quorum requirement, so abstaining is as good as voting "Yes."

From Jim McCormack of Austin. Jim is a former General Counsel and Chief Disciplinary Counsel to the State Bar of Texas. (If you’re a Texas lawyer, you’ve probably received Jim’s emails about the referendum).

From Austin, Texas personal-injury/unemployment lawyer Joe Crews:

The State Bar's ethics "expert" Lillian Hardwick has hitched her horse to "concierge attorney" Robert S. "…" Bennett's ethical wagon: (Source.) Robert S. "…" Bennett, you'll recall, was the consumer lawyer who tried to represent Allen Stanford in a case that he seems to have gotten by badmouthing Kent Schaffer in an email: Allen Stanford Documents

The State Bar's "you criminal defense lawyers are all violating the rules already" response to concerns about the rule amendment gutting flat fees, which I marked here, was written by "Lillian Hartwick," whom the response describes as "a former chair of the State Bar TDRPC Committee." (Archived PDF here.) There is no "Lillian Hartwick" licensed to practice law in Texas. There is, however, a Lillian Hardwick. (The

Question D on the State Bar’s referendum seeks approval of amended rules 1.13, 1.14, and 1.17.Rule 1.13. Prohibited Sexual Relations(a) A lawyer shall not condition the representation of a client or prospective client, or the quality of such representation, on having any person engage in sexual relations with the lawyer.(b) A lawyer shall not solicit or accept sexual relations as payment of fees or expenses.(c) A lawyer

Besides an attempt to eviscerate flat fees, what is the State Bar asking us to approve in Question A of its referendum, and is any of it worth the harm that will be done to criminal defendants in Texas? Here’s Question A: Do you favor the adoption of Proposed Rules 1.00-1.05 and 1.15-1.16 of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, as published in the December 2010