An attorney’s racism can be grounds for granting a marginalized defendant a new trial, even if bigoted comments weren’t directed at the client, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court said.
The court is the first in the nation to rule that a lawyer’s racism directed at a group his client identifies with constitutes a conflict of interest. The decision sets a model for other states to consider when they are confronted with an attorney’s alleged bigotry.
The attorney’s “unabashed anti-Muslim rants were matched only by his equal scorn for and racism against Black persons,” Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt’s opinion said.
“The ...
Learn more about Bloomberg Law or Log In to keep reading:
See Breaking News in Context
Bloomberg Law provides trusted coverage of current events enhanced with legal analysis.
Already a subscriber?
Log in to keep reading or access research tools and resources.