LIT COMMENTARY
We’re reviewing the attorneys who are listed on the CFPB v. Ocwen case in Florida, who are representing Ocwen. This article focuses on the background of liar lawyer Sabrina Rose-Smith (or Sabrina Rose Smith) and her unethical practices as a partner for this big law firm in Washington, D.C.
Sabrina is a member of the Virginia State Bar and you can see the lawyer professional guidelines here and all the disciplinary cases against lawyers here. She is also a member of the DC Bar, where the Burkes have filed their complaint.
Post Edited: Who is Catalina Azuero, a Liar Lawyer at Goodwin Procter LLP? https://t.co/HgLtKwkQVZ
— LawsInTexas (@lawsintexasusa) October 27, 2020
Lawyer Complaint (D.C. Bar) : Sabrina Rose-Smith
This complaint is against an attorney registered with the District of Columbia (D.C.) State Bar. The lawyers’ name is Sabrina Rose-Smith and she works for Goodwin Procter, LLP. Her law firm represents Ocwen in the cited case below and she is one of the named counsel of record. The Burkes claim that Ms. Rose-Smith violated (at a minimum) Rule 4.1, Truthfulness in Statements To Others; In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly: (a) make a false statement of fact or law[.] See In re Mitchell, 822 A.2d 1106 (D.C. 2003) and; Rule 3.3, Candor Toward the Tribunal; In re Uchendu, 812 A.2d 933 (D.C. 2002), Rule 4.4, Respect For Rights Of Third Persons; See In re Pelkey, 962 A.2d 268 (D.C. 2008); Rule 5.1 Responsibilities Of Partners And Supervisory Lawyers; See In re Cohen, 847 A.2d 1162 (D.C. 2004); Rule 8.4, Misconduct; See In re Mitchell, 822 A.2d 1106 (D.C. 2003). Then there’s the Cobb County cases described herein, of which Ms. Rose-Smith is counsel. Then there is the violation of Rules 1.7, Conflict of Interest; 1.9 and 1.16 and 1.10 with respect to Ms. Rose-Smith. See Lavender v. Protective Life Corp., Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-02275-AKK, at *25-26 (N.D. Ala. Jan. 31, 2017).
Other cases specific to Goodwin are discussed below. The Burkes also draw the Bar’s attention to; Cruickshank v. Dixon (In re Blast Fitness Grp., LLC), No. 16-10236-MSH (Bankr. D. Mass. Jan. 8, 2019)
And there’s also former Goodwin lawyer, now law professor, Associate Professor Luke M. Scheuer who previously held adjunct positions at Boston College Law School, the University of Massachusetts School of Law, and Boston University School of Law and his paper; “Duty to Disclose Lawyer Misconduct” (2010), Available at: https://works.bepress.com/luke_scheuer/2/, wherein he discusses cases like In Re Himmel.
The Burkes Motion to Intervene in Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau v. Ocwen Fin. Corp., No. 9:17-CV-80495-MARRA-MATTHEWMAN (S.D. Fla. 2017-2020)
Background: The CFPB initiated the civil case on April 20, 2017, alleging that Ocwen, in servicing borrowers’ loans, engaged in various acts and practices in violation of federal consumer financial laws. On January 4, 2019, Joanna and John Burke sought leave to intervene under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24. (Doc. 220). The CFPB and Ocwen jointly opposed the motion to intervene (Doc. 224) and the Burkes filed a reply brief (Doc. 237). On May 30, 2019, the district court denied the Burkes’ motion to intervene (Doc. 375). The Burkes moved for reconsideration (Doc. 408). The Court denied that motion on July 3, 2019, (Doc. 411), and the Burkes noticed an appeal on August 2, 2019 to the Eleventh Cir., Case No. 19-13015. The Burkes have argued that Ocwen’s counsel, Ms. Sabrina Rose-Smith knowingly committed perjury and withheld evidence of the Greens case from the Burkes.
Denial of Intervention ‘As of Right’: Judge Marra denied the Burkes intervention as of right (Doc. 375, p. 4).
Denial of Intervention ‘Permissively’: Judge Marra also concluded the Burkes should be denied permissive intervention.
Analysis of Judge Marra’s Order [Reconsideration]; The Burkes then asked Judge Marra to reconsider. The courts fleeting order follows (Doc. 411, p. 3);
“In addition to the grounds stated in the Court’s Order Denying Intervention (ECF No. 375), the Court notes that intervention is not permitted to allow a party to seek or obtain evidence for other litigation as asserted by the proposed Intervenors. (See ECF No. 408 at 4).”
PAGE DELETED IN MAY 2023 BY HOLLINS
Sabrina Rose-Smith
Rose-Smith received a J.D. from Vanderbilt in 2003. She joined Goodwin Procter (Washington, D.C.) in 2008 as an associate in the firm’s litigation department and was made partner in 2010. Her practice includes defending financial institutions against consumer class actions and government-enforcement actions. She also provides regulatory compliance counseling for banks, credit card issuers, mortgage lenders, and specialty finance companies. In 2015 she was named the firm’s Leadership Council on Legal Diversity (LCLD) Fellow. The LCLD Fellows program identifies, trains, and advances the next generation of leaders in the legal profession. The LCLD is an organization of more than 220 corporate chief legal officers and law firm chairs and managing partners who have dedicated themselves to creating a truly diverse legal profession.
YOUR DONATION(S) WILL HELP US:
• Continue to provide this website, content, resources, community and help center for free to the many homeowners, residents, Texans and as we’ve expanded, people nationwide who need access without a paywall or subscription.
• Help us promote our campaign through marketing, pr, advertising and reaching out to government, law firms and anyone that will listen and can assist.
Thank you for your trust, belief and support in our conviction to help Floridian residents and citizens nationwide take back their freedom. Your Donations and your Voice are so important.
LIT COMMENTARY
Goodwin Procter LLP, now rebranded to Goodwin Law is a creditor rights law firm, defending Banks e.g. Bank of America and Non-Banks, e.g. Ocwen Financial et al. This Big Law firm continually violates professional ethical codes of conduct when litigating cases. Below highlights a few examples; The Goodwin Law Hall of Shame.
