By FITSNews || Larry Richter – a disgraced former judge and ex-State Senator who is currently running for Lieutenant Governor of South Carolina – is once again facing scrutiny regarding allegations that he colluded with a Circuit Court judge to pocket $2.5 million in legal fees and “steer away” child molestation charges that were leveled against the Catholic Diocese of Charleston, S.C.
The case – which we touched on in a story last February – has already effectively killed the Supreme Court candidacy of Diane Goodstein, the judge who is alleged to have colluded with Richter. Now it threatens to derail Richter’s candidacy for Lt. Governor – which could result in the ethically-challenged attorney withdrawing from a statewide race for the second time in his career.
At the heart of the case – which was filed with the State Supreme Court in December 2008 – is the allegation that Richter and Goodstien conspired with the powerful Diocese of Charleston to deny justice to altar boys who were the victims of alleged sexual abuse.
“Collusion by a church, lawyers and a judge to harm the rights and interests of victims of sexual abuse constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct which exceeds all possible bounds of decency and which must be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community,” the complaint states.
Goodstein refused to comment on the case, while Richter and his law partner, David Haller, have denied the allegations.
However, an affidavit from the state’s top expert in the field of legal ethics – University of South Carolina law school professor Michael J. Virzi – concludes that Richter and Haller engaged in multiple “negligent acts and omissions” in representing the altar boys.
Among those “negligent acts” were “failure to provide competent representation,” “failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness,” “failure to keep clients reasonably informed,” “attempting to charge and charging an unreasonable fee,” “representing clients when the representation involved a concurrent conflict of interest” and “conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.”
Virzi’s affidavit also uncovered nine separate instances omissions of responsibility in which Richter and Haller acted in a manner that was “disadvantageous to their own clients and advantageous to the Diocese.” In addition to these “negligent acts and omissions,” Virzi also found that Richter was performing “continuing work on behalf of the Diocese” while ostensibly representing the altar boys.
Perhaps the most damaging of the allegations, however, is that Richter and Haller engaged in fraudulent billing practices – including the entry of “clearly false” time sheets outlining so-called “work” they had done on the case. It is also alleged that the lawyers made false statements to the court in defense of these “nonsensical” documents.
In short, the affidavit is a laundry list of unethical and potentially criminal conduct which provides ample justification for the charges against Richter – with only the alleged collusion with Judge Goodstein left unaddressed.
Virzi, incidentally, is the current chairman of the South Carolina Bar’s Ethics Advisory Committee – i.e. no slouch.
Richter has been referred to the Supreme Court’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel in the past for unethical behavior, but he’s always been protected by his good friend S.C. Chief Justice Jean Toal.
It will be interesting to see if Toal continues to stand by Richter given the particularly heinous nature of these charges. It will also be interesting to see if Toal – who has sat on the case for more than a year – rules before Republican primary voters head to the polls on June 8 to select their statewide nominees.
Richter has run for statewide office once before, but was forced to drop that bid – a 2002 campaign for Attorney General – when stories regarding his alleged cocaine use resurfaced.
WEB EXTRA
Virzi Affidavit
By justsayin' April 15, 2010 at 10:12 am
and what church does the Chief attend?
By PalmettoPatriot April 15, 2010 at 10:34 am
“state’s top expert in the field of legal ethics…”
With all due respect to Mr. Virzi, he is not considered to be the top expert in the field of legal ethics. He is not a full professor at USC Law, nor is he even an instructor in of Legal Ethics, rather he teaches Legal Writing. I think this article overlooks the fact that Nathan Crystal, Dean Wilcox, and Professor Freeman are all far more well know for their Professional Responsibility bona fides. Given that Mr. Virzi only finished law school in 2000, I’m sure he would agree that anyone of those gentlemen have more experience in that area than he does.
By WorkingTommyC April 15, 2010 at 10:45 am
Is all this crap hanging over his head how Richter was talked into being the “kamikaze candidate” aimed at deck of the super-carrier, USS Bill Connor?
Or did he and Ken Ard work out a deal?
Either way, it’s pretty obvious that he’s playing the foaming-at-the-mouth attack dog for Ken Ard’s campaign.
By PalmettoPatriot April 15, 2010 at 10:46 am
I think this article’s credibility also suffers somewhat since you neglect to mention that Mr. Virzi’s affidavit, which he signed nearly a year and half ago, was given as part of a malpractice lawsuit. Under the tort reform law, set forth in SC Code 15-36-100, a plaintiff must get an affidavit from another individual in a given field to file bring suit for professional malpractice; the article makes it sound like this affidavit was being offered by a wholly disinterested person and not in a capacity as an expert witness.
By bkm April 15, 2010 at 10:47 am
Is this the sleazebag lawyer who defended drug dealers who got caught in Charleston near the Port or some other dirty industrial area, shovel in hand, digging up the drug dealer’s stash of cash that was to be used as his payment for services rendered to this drug dealer? This guys cocaine use is well known as a judge and a dirtbag of a Senator if there was ever one. What kind of idiot would vote for this douchebag?
By DowntownCharleston April 15, 2010 at 10:51 am
Larry Richter is a scoundrel. It is an insult to South Carolinians when his name appears on any ballot.
By outsider looking away April 15, 2010 at 10:53 am
This is great news! This is why I am supporting a man with a strong Christian faith!
VOTE CONNOR!
By Do whatever it takes April 15, 2010 at 10:57 am
This is the exact momentum that we need for the primary. I want to encourage each of you to find information about a tea party in your area and come out over the next few days to meet Bill Connor. he is the real deal and is tea party approved!
By outsider looking away April 15, 2010 at 10:57 am
is Larry Richter catholic?
By SubZeroIQ April 15, 2010 at 11:01 am
Fits: This may not be directly related to the story above, although I am embarassed by your sometimes attacks on truly excellent black judges and other officials in what appears to me to be racism. Well, Tandy Carter happens to be black AND CORRUPT and incompetent. It is a mark of true non-racism to not have what W called “the soft bigotry of lowered expectations.” Having said that,this comment was posted early this morning on the The State web-site and received 14 recommendations and two quotations. Within hours, it was hidden. I hope YOU have the journalistic integrity and concern for public safety to run in here. Here it goes:
Chief Carter is putting fire-red lipstick on the pig that is his administration of Columbia’s Police Department, “CPD.” This corrupt man had ME arrested on false harassment charges for having tried to alert CPD to suspected prostitution in my neighborhood. I represented myself in a five-day jury trial which ended in my NOT being convicted. I called Carter as a hostile witness. Under oath, he admitted having held an unusual “round table” basically to put the fix in against me before arresting me but he denied even knowing about a media-reported incident. In that incident around October 2009, a CPD officer let go a solicitor of an alleged under-age prostitute because the officer’s wife was then the solicitor’s secretary. That solicitor resigned the next day from his job as a top lawyer in South Carolina’s Attorney General’s Office. Carter and Deputy Fifth Circuit Solicitor Meadors sit back, let the county sheriffs do the work, then rush to the photo-op. Carter must resign or be fired and Meadors should abandon his bid for Solicitor. Meadors while sober has no more ethical control on the Solicitor’s office than Giese while drunk. Ask Meadors and Carter what they did to me after I provided their offices with photos of a man (probably a client of a suspected prostitute in my neigborhood) grabbing his crotch then standing “turgid” in my parking lot. They had ME arrested under false charges that my photographing suspicious people caused those people “emotional discomfort.”
Read more: http://www.thestate.com/2010/04/13/1242711/columbia-police-arrest-24-in-prostitution.html#ixzz0l5BC4iaK
By fitsnews April 15, 2010 at 11:10 am
Palmetto Patriot,
You guys are attacking the integrity of the ethics lawyer?
Jesus Christ …
-FITS
By Do whatever it takes April 15, 2010 at 11:21 am
Working Tommy C,
You have an unhealthly mancrush on Ken Ard. Give it up already.
Bill Connor is a war hero and shouldn’t be compared to a ship. He is a human. I agree he’s the best man for the job, but why do you feel the need to bring Ard’s name up EVERY time you post? Let’s focus on what’s great about our candidate, Bill Connor
By misstate April 15, 2010 at 11:22 am
P Patriot…so ridiculous
are the professors that you mention rallying around richter?
someone should look into connors tenure while he was a law school student
not sure “christian faith” is how it would be described
By Seriously Fits? April 15, 2010 at 11:35 am
I have to agree with the earlier post, it seems your personal vendetta against someone would be better served if you actually used an ethics expert not just someone you probably hang out with in Columbia. For instance had Nathan Crystal, who writes books about ethics and is considered an expert, actually come out and said something, that would be meaningful in this discussion. Way to go grinding an axe again. Just out of curiosity which one of the candidates is paying you this cycle to attack the rest of the field?
By Jeff April 15, 2010 at 11:43 am
Oh lookie here.
Larry Richter got $1000 from Judge Goodstein too.
http://palmstatepolitics.blogspot.com/2010/04/richter-blasted-in-affidavit-regarding.html
By CNSYD April 15, 2010 at 11:46 am
If anyone should know, FITS should know that in the LE and lawyer game “charges” are written to make the “suspect” sound like Charles Manson. IRT who an attorney defends, does that mean that they only defend based on their belief of their client’s innocence? Did Susan Smith have an attorney? Yes. Did her attorney believe she was innocent? No.
By fitsnews April 15, 2010 at 12:03 pm
Haters:
We’ve never met Virzi. We attempted to call him for this story and couldn’t reach him.
We’ve also made it perfectly – and publicly – clear why we detest Richter.
“Unfair, Imbalanced,” remember?
Try answering the fucking merits of the affidavit, you scumbags.
Or are you all going to join the Chief Justice in turning a blind eye to this sort of thing?
-FITS
By misstate April 15, 2010 at 12:13 pm
oh why answer the merits????
attack the messenger is so much more fun….
By PalmettoPatriot April 15, 2010 at 12:20 pm
I have no opinion about the merits of the allegations in the lawsuit or the affidavit, nor was I attacking the integrity of the ethics lawyer; indeed, he would definitely have to believe what he said to have put it in a signed affidavit for use in court. My point was simply that the affidavit itself was being used as evidence in an adversarial proceeding and that this gentleman was acting as an expert witness, and not as an independent aribter of legal ethics or on behalf of the Supreme Court’s investigative office — a position his affidavit indicates that he previously held. I think your article suggests that this Professor was acting in a disinterested capacity when offering his opinions, when they were in fact being used as evidence to support a lawsuit brought by attorneys for people who felt the settlement you have discussed was unfair.
By Harumph April 15, 2010 at 12:26 pm
Virzi is smart and has greater expertise in the area of legal ethics than most people, but he’s certainly ethically challenged in his personal life. What that has to do with his ability render an objective opinion in his affidavit is unclear to me. But apart from such distractions, who needed this episode to know Larry Richter is a worthless crook with no business holding a bar license, much less serving in public office again.
By SCLAWBOY April 15, 2010 at 12:31 pm
I believe that Virzi’s affidavit, which is his opinion as an expert witness in a civil case, is valid. I also think that he is well versed in ethics but not “the state’s top expert in the field of legal ethics”.
Your attacks on Richter are valid. I think the hyperbole and the failure to disclose the purpose and intent of the affidavit affect your credibility slightly. If you care…
By WorkingTommyC April 15, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Do:
I was comparing Connor’s campaign to a super-carrier–sorry if I did not make that clear. His campaign–the result of an incredible amount of work on the part of him and his staff–is like a juggernaut now. Very impressive.
It seems apparent that the establishment is upset at the thought of Bill Connor winning and is using some desperate tactics at this late date to knock him down, hence the kamikaze comparison.
Otherwise, why the devil is Richter running? A snowball in hell is like asbestos compared to Richter’s chances of winning. There is an obvious establishment RINO tactic being implemented here it seems to me.
And I apologize for connecting Ken Ard with this Richter mess. I didn’t realize I was doing that =;>)
By Ynotfirst April 15, 2010 at 2:19 pm
we are taking out the trash ya’ll.
By Todd April 15, 2010 at 2:25 pm
Virzi finished law school in 2000 and finally got his sister, Barbara Marie Verne Seymour to hire him at the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) – where it was kept secret they were brother and sister – in 2003. Virzi changed his name to an old Italian version of the name. In 2006, Sister Barbara hired Anna, Virzi’s present (3rd) wife as her paralegal at the ODC. Dear Anna it seems was pregnant and married Virzi about 3 months after her hire….just when she got her health insurance. Virzi left in 2007 to teach legal writing at the USC School of Law. Virzi now represents lawyers against dear ole sis, Barbara. Oh, yeah, that’s an ethical bunch Queen Jean has got protecting the public from unethical lawyers.
By sclawyerIII April 15, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Probably every story Folks runs about Richter should include the disclosure that Richter was his wife’s divorce attorney in an bitter proceeding that left Folks with a criminal record for domestic abuse.
That’s fair knowledge for the reader to have in judging the credibility of wholly unsupported statements such as Folks’ assertion that the professor that gave the affidavit was the top expert on legal ethics in South Carolina.
Certainly as the fellow above pointed out, this gentlemen has relatively small experience and reputation in that field compared with other notable authorities in this state. And he is serving in the capacity as a paid expert, which is somewhat different from being a disinterested bystander.
that has little to do with the merits of the case at hand, which I’m fairly sure none of us has had the opportunity to fully examine the evidence.
I suspect Folks really doesn’t care whether the allegations are true or not so long as it causes harm to someone he considers an enemy. But, Folks has never made any attempt to hold himself out as a disinterested party.
By Jeff April 15, 2010 at 2:53 pm
Combined with Larry Richter’s bid for Lt Gov falling apart, Ken Ard sees his ship sinking as well.
http://palmstatepolitics.blogspot.com/2010/04/ken-ard-continuing-to-fall-behind-in-lt.html
I’m betting there won’t even be a run-off. Connor wins it all June 8.
By smalltownlawyer April 15, 2010 at 2:54 pm
“which I’m fairly sure none of us has had the opportunity to fully examine the evidence”
The evidence, including the expert’s affidavit, and Richter’s billing records and lots more are attached to the Complaint which is filed in the Charleston County Clerk of Court. Very interesting reading.
By Jeff April 15, 2010 at 3:00 pm
I find it very interesting that these lawyers come on here and instead of providing anything constructive regarding the charges against Richter, instead choose to go after Will.
That’s fairly typical of what Larry Richter has done int he campaign. Attack his opponent Connor rather that constructive discussion of the issues facing the citizens of South Carolina.
By sclawboy April 15, 2010 at 4:10 pm
Jeff,
I in no way defend Richter. He is shit.
Will should, however, not misrepresent 1) Virzi’s credentials, 2) the purpose of Virzi’s affidavit, or 3) his reasons for hating on Richter. Although he admits to being unfair and imbalanced, he should at least be honest.
By fitsnews April 15, 2010 at 4:27 pm
Here is a comment our founding editor posted on this matter a few months back. We hope it clears things up …
By fitsnews on February 9th, 2010 at 12:33 pm | Edit Comment
Crash (this is Will),
Sure.
Richter represented my former fiance in the now-infamous 2005 CDV case – a matter in which I (ill-advisedly) pleaded guilty to something I didn’t do in large part due to my former boss (the governor) throwing me completely under the bus.
I won’t get down into the weeds but over the course of that “trial,” there were some tactics employed by Richter which were less than savory at best, completely dishonest at worst. Anybody wishing to read about all that (and congrats on having that sort of free time if you do) should feel free to FOIA the Office of Disciplinary Counsel at the S.C. Supreme Court. They have the record of my complaint and the response of the Court.
I will say one word in Richter’s defense – when he had me down, he did not hesitate to go for the jugular and “finish me,” as they say in Mortal Kombat lore. Unfortunately, he didn’t accomplish that objective.
Obviously, I don’t sit around all day and think of ways to make Richter’s life miserable (FITS would be a pretty boring website if I did), but when he slithers onto my radar screen from time-to-time, I don’t hesitate to take a shot.
Oh, and when the guy is being investigated for conspiring with a judge to commit fraud and circumvent justice for sexually-abused altar boys, you better believe that’s the sort of thing I’m going to write about.
Look, I don’t know what level of honesty you wanted or how cut and dried you were expecting me to be about all of this, but there it is.
Chips now falling where they may.
Oh … thanks for asking, and thanks for reading FITS.
-Will Folks
By Jeff April 15, 2010 at 5:02 pm
SCLAWBOY,
My comments were more directed at Todd and SCLawyerIII
I’ve seen the reasons as will just posted before and know his disgust for Richter is real and valid.
As far as you initial comment regarding what Richter is… BINGO!
By Doris April 15, 2010 at 8:17 pm
Todd: You don’t even know the worst about Virzi or I guess you would have posted it. He and Seymour appear bullet proof with Toal and the other 4 don’t care. Insiders say that the ODC is all Toal’s baby and the rest won’t touch it or question her at all. Coggiola? Dumb as a brick. Ask us girls in low places if you want to know something. Ritcher? He’s got something on Toal. Has to.
By GTO April 15, 2010 at 11:25 pm
Richter tried to shake me down years ago when he was a state senator. I refused to pay. He is unethical as hell.
By bqueen April 16, 2010 at 7:52 am
While, I am no Larry Richter fan, FITS you lose credibility on this one. Virzi wrote the affidavit in the capacity of an expert witness. He was paid for his role in the matter as expert witnesses don’t do this stuff for free. As such Virzi is already beholden to the lawyer paying his fee. Now if a totally impartial (and truly ethical) judge writes an opinion with these exact same language, we have a different story.
By Matt April 16, 2010 at 10:50 am
Rick Beltram is involved with Larry Richter’s campaign. Enough said.
By Jeff April 16, 2010 at 12:44 pm
More backlash on Larry’s comments a few nights ago
http://palmstatepolitics.blogspot.com/2010/04/is-it-larry-richters-arrogance-or-is-it.html
I can’t believe this guy even entered the race. I think that’s where is arrogance is most apparent.
By WorkingTommyC April 16, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Is it true that he’s about to announce his withdrawal from the race???
By B.Knight April 16, 2010 at 2:17 pm
The comment below has an err. SC Code 15-36-100 has a SC Appeals Court exception. In Mali v Odem you do not need an expert affidavit to sue a lawyer or other professional if the claim and violation is of ‘common knowledge’ meaning to a layperson.
______________________ (quoted from blog)>>>
By PalmettoPatriot on April 15th, 2010 at 10:46 am
I think this article’s credibility also suffers somewhat since you neglect to mention that Mr. Virzi’s affidavit, which he signed nearly a year and half ago, was given as part of a malpractice lawsuit. Under the tort reform law, set forth in SC Code 15-36-100, a plaintiff must get an affidavit from another individual in a given field to file bring suit for professional malpractice; the article makes it sound like this affidavit was being offered by a wholly disinterested person and not in a capacity as an expert witness.
By Lilly Collette April 21, 2010 at 8:08 am
“Collusion by [...], lawyers and a judge to harm the rights and interests of victims [...] constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct which exceeds all possible bounds of decency and which must be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community,”.
OKAY. Now see:
http://www.judicial.state.sc.us/opinions/displayOpinion.cfm?caseNo=25346
In the Matter of Anonymous Member of S.C. Bar
“Our judges must use their authority to make sure that abusive […] tactics and other forms of […] abuse do not succeed in their ultimate goal: achieving success through abuse […] rather than by the rule of law.”
TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, BURNETT, JJ., and Acting Justice C. Victor Pyle, Jr., concur.
The above all concurred in this statement which was published on August 20, 2001, and then this same court ignores all complaints of criminal misconduct by officers of the family court.
(Ethics — go figure.)
Pingback: Larry Richter trying to purchase the race for South Carolina Lt Governor « RINO Rage