Opinion of the Court — Lawrence v. O'Brien

This writing

Type: Opinion of the Court
Filed: June 21, 2002
Case: Lawrence v. O'Brien
Case status: Decided

Source No authoring judge could be established for this writing, either from provider metadata or from the signature line of the court's published opinion. Benchlight shows the gap rather than guessing at an author.

Opening text

The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.

ORDER Allen Lawrence, Jr., a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court order dismissing his legal malpractice action. Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332 . This case has been referred to a panel of the court pursuant to Rule 34(j)(1), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). Seeking monetary relief, Lawrence sued Daniel J. O’Brien, the Ohio attorney who acted as standby counsel during Lawrence’s trial on drug, weapons, and conspiracy charges in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky in December 1999. Lawrence alleged that O’Brien (1) had a conflict of interest; and (2) advised him to waive the right to appeal the forfeiture of his property. O’Brien moved to dismiss the complaint under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6), and Lawrence filed a response. The district court directed the parties to address the issue of “whether a criminal defendant, who has waived his constitutional right to counsel, can later have a cause of action against the attorney whose representation he rejected but who was appointed by the court to b…

Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.