Judge Dismisses Disciplinary Suit Against Austin Attorney
A judge has dismissed the disciplinary lawsuit that the Commission for Lawyer Discipline brought against an Austin attorney for his alleged misconduct in sending demand letters to businesses alleging that their websites violated rules under the Americans for Disabilities Act.
February 21, 2018 at 03:42 PM
3 minute read
A judge has dismissed the disciplinary lawsuit that the Commission for Lawyer Discipline brought against an Austin attorney for his alleged misconduct in sending demand letters to businesses alleging that their websites violated rules under the Americans for Disabilities Act.
In an order signed Feb. 20, Judge R.H. Wallace Jr. of Fort Worth's 96th District Court, sitting by assignment, granted Rosales' motion to dismiss Commission for Lawyer Discipline v. Omar Weaver Rosales. Wallace dismissed all of the CFLD's claims against Rosales “with prejudice to refiling of the same.”
Rosales, a solo practitioner, declined comment and referred questions to his attorney. He had filed his motion to dismiss the CFLD's suit pursuant to the Texas Citizens' Participation Act, commonly called the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statute.
Gaines West, who represents Rosales, said, “This is the first order, of which I am aware, dealing with the TCPA anti-SLAPP statute in a grievance lawsuit.”
West is a partner in West, Webb, Allbritton & Gentry in College Station and served as chairman of the State Bar of Texas Grievance Oversight Committee from 2006 to 2010.
The CFLD filed its suit against Rosales in 2017 after receiving grievances that claimed Rosales was sending abusive demand letters, mostly to healthcare businesses, that alleged the recipients' websites violated the ADA and demanding payments of $2,000 from each recipient. To most of his letters, Rosales attached an “unfiled lawsuit” and a list of areas in which the recipients' websites violated supposed rules of the ADA. But the CFLD alleged in its petition that Rosales had copied the rules from an online checklist and misrepresented that they came from federal administrative rules.
Rosales stated in his letters to healthcare providers that they had to report themselves to the federal Department of Health and Human Services and to forfeit federal funds until their websites were recertified. If a business failed to self-report, the letter stated that Rosales he would contact DHHS and discuss reimbursement of federal tax dollars that the business “improperly obtained from the government.”
The CFLD alleged that Rosales' letters contained frivolous assertions because Rosales lacks standing. According to Rosales' motion for dismissal, however, he is “a disabled citizen himself” and was merely communicating the failure of each recipient's website.
The motion to dismiss argued, among other thing, that Rosales is entitled to dismissal of the suit against him because a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the CFLD's suit is based on, relates to or is in response to his “exercise of free speech” about a matter of public concern.
Rosales had run into problems in 2016 with separate ADA lawsuits he had filed alleging disability discrimination in the access to Austin area businesses. He was suspended for three years from practicing in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas and ordered to pay almost $176,000 in sanctions for alleged misconduct.
According to Rosales' motion to dismiss the CFLD's suit, the commission's reliance on the Western District's orders is “inapplicable.”
West said that Wallace ordered the State Bar to pay $65,000 in the CFLD case. If a motion to dismiss is granted in an anti-SLAPP case, the court has to award attorney's fees, he said.
What the bar might do regarding the case is unknown.
“We need to consult with our client, which is the Commission for Lawyer Discipline,” said Claire Mock, a bar spokeswoman.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTexas Court Invalidates SEC’s Dealer Rule, Siding with Crypto Advocates
3 minute readSamsung Flooded With Galaxy Product Patent Lawsuits in Texas Federal Court
Haynes Boone, Hicks Thomas Get Dismissal of $1.3B Claims in 2022 Freeport LNG Terminal Explosion
3 minute readIn Talc Bankruptcy, Andy Birchfield Skipped His Deposition. Could He Face Sanctions?
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250