Judge: "You can't withdraw to care for your Mom with Stage 4 cancer"
Oct 06, 2023
Brian Glass
Can you imagine being a lawyer in a high-profile murder case, and then being told by the Court of Appeals that you can't leave the case even though your mother is dying of cancer? We're going to unravel the ethical knots in the case of Katarina Voss, Michael Draven, and David Runyon, who were convicted for the murder of Corey Voss. We'll dive into how the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is compelling a lawyer to remain on a habeas corpus appeal, and the discovery violation of 40 out of 70 bankers boxes that were not turned over during the appeal.
____________________________________ Brian Glass is a nationally recognized personal injury lawyer. He is passionate about living a life of his own design and looking for answers to solutions outside of the legal field. This podcast is his effort to share that passion with others.
Can you imagine being a lawyer in a high-profile murder case, and then being told by the Court of Appeals that you can't leave the case even though your mother is dying of cancer? We're going to unravel the ethical knots in the case of Katarina Voss, Michael Draven, and David Runyon, who were convicted for the murder of Corey Voss. We'll dive into how the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals is compelling a lawyer to remain on a habeas corpus appeal, and the discovery violation of 40 out of 70 bankers boxes that were not turned over during the appeal.
____________________________________ Brian Glass is a nationally recognized personal injury lawyer. He is passionate about living a life of his own design and looking for answers to solutions outside of the legal field. This podcast is his effort to share that passion with others.
Welcome back to another Friday solo episode of Time Freedom for Lawyers. This is the last episode that's coming out before the Great Legal Marketing Summit, which is next week, October 12th to 14th, in Orlando. If something cleared off your calendar, if you've finally decided that I have something worth listening to and you want to come hang out in Orlando for three days, learn from some of the best people in the legal industry on how to be a better digital marketer, how to run a better law firm, the mindsets, methods and tactics that you need to make 2024 your best year ever. Tickets are still available at GLMSummitcom that's wwwglmsummitcom and we want to see you down there. I think you'll agree.
Speaker 1:
I don't do a whole lot of talking about the law on this podcast for lawyers, but I've got a legal opinion that came out last week I think at the end of last week that I think it's just unbelievable that I want to share with you, as this show sits at the intersection of law and entrepreneurship and family.
Speaker 1:
And there's an opinion that just came down from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the appellate court that encompasses Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia. And in this opinion the Fourth Circuit tells a woman whose mom is dying of stage four cancer that she cannot withdraw as counsel from a habeas corpus appeal and I'll get into all of what that means because the interests of justice require that she remain in the case rather than take time off and care for her mother, and I think it's just an unbelievable opinion. I want to share it with you today. Hey, just popping back into the beginning of this episode because I just finished up recording, Just want to let you know if you got kids in the car. I curse more than normal in this episode, so maybe put it on hold and listen to it later. Okay, let's dive in.
Speaker 2:
Welcome to Time Freedom for Lawyers, where the goal is to become less busy, make more money and spend more time doing what you want instead of what you have to Bringing together guests from all walks of life who are living a life of their own design and sharing actionable tips for how you, too, can live the life of your dreams. Now here's your host, Brian Glass.
Speaker 1:
Alright, here's the background on this case. In 2007, a woman named Katarina Voss was having an affair with Michael Draven, and Katarina and Michael decided to murder Katarina's husband, corey, in the hopes of getting his Navy death benefits and life insurance proceeds. So they hired this guy, david Runyon, to do the hit. Shortly before the crime, katarina opens up a new bank account at a local bank in Newport News and she puts $5 into the account. On the night of the murder, she sends her husband out to the ATM to pull out some cash. Of course, there's only $5 in the account, so he was never going to be able to do this. But she's got David Runyon to go out to the ATM where he finds Corey Voss, shoots him in his pickup truck and kills him. Katarina, michael Draven and Runyon are ultimately all arrested. Katarina pleads guilty to all counts and is sentenced to life. Runyon and Draven proceed to trial and David Runyon gets sentenced to the death penalty, which at the time in Virginia was still a thing. It's since been abolished, and so he's been on death row now for what's that? 16 years. Of course, as with all death penalty cases, there are tons and tons of appeals, and one of the appeals in this case was called a habeas corpus appeal, and it's based on the idea that Runyon's lawyers at trial didn't do enough to investigate the possibility that he had a brain injury, and had they done enough to investigate that possibility and bring it in front of the jury? The argument is that the jury would have seen that as a mitigating factor and would not have sentenced him to death, would instead have sentenced him to life in prison, and so this is what goes on in almost every death penalty case, and at this point, 16 years later, of course, he doesn't have money to pay for lawyers, and so David Runyon's case is being pursued now by the Capital Representation Resource Center, which is based out of Virginia, and, as you might imagine, the case that's gone on for 16 years that resulted out of an investigation into a death. There's just tons and tons of information, and so in 2022 and 2023, this dispute arises over whether the defense had given to the prosecution all of the information that they were supposed to give to the prosecution and all of the information that the court had ordered them to give, as during the discovery response. And just to give you, like some perspective here, apparently there's 70 bankers boxes with tens of thousands of files. Hard drive with 126 gigabytes of data including over 187,000 files. Flash drive with another 14 gigabytes of data including 9,000 files. All of this stuff needs to be reviewed in pursuing the appeal, and so this dispute arises.
Speaker 1:
In February 2023, before the Capital Resource Project gets involved in the case. There's, for some reason, there's a public defender from Tennessee who's handling the case and they apparently violated the discovery order. Something like 40 of those bankers boxes had not been turned over to the prosecution during the course of this habeas appeal phase, and so the court gets pissed off. Rightly so, right. Massive discovery violation court, I think, kicks one of the Tennessee lawyers out of the case. The other one then, in court pleadings, blames the one who's been kicked out of the case. She gets ethically conflicted out of the case also in parachutes Capital Resource Project. But, of course, with 70 bankers, boxes worth of stuff, 126 gigabytes of data and I don't know what's the math on that almost 200,000 files takes a little bit of time to get up and running on these kinds of cases.
Speaker 1:
So fast forward to this summer, we're coming up on another deadline in the court's schedule and the woman who is handling the case for the Capital Resource Project. Her mom is diagnosed with stage four cancer. So she comes to the court and says I would like to withdraw from the case. I don't have the capacity to both care for my mother and do a good job zealously representing my client. They've been running in the case and the court the district court in Virginia bizarrely does not let her out of this case. In fact, the court says no, I think your ethical obligation is to stay in the case. And this is a direct quote from the transcript of the hearing of the motion of withdrawal.
Speaker 1:
The court says you would be, in my opinion, violating your duties to Mr Runyon by not staying in this case, because you have the institutional memory and it doesn't mean that you have to work on the case every day. But there are computers, there are emails, there's telephones. Court says you could stay in this case, you could take a backseat to your co-counsel, but I'm not going to let you out of the case. Now just imagine somebody that you love has stage four lung cancer and you've asked a court for permission and withdrawal for the case so that you can care for them and spend as much time with them as possible in their last Weeks, months, whatever it is, and the court says no. The court says you have an ethical obligation Because you sworn oath to the bar and we're gonna keep you in this case and make you continue to work on this case. And in addition to that, the court in this case Refuse to allow six big law lawyers who were offering their services pro bono to become counsel of record and Step in and carry some of the water.
Speaker 1:
In this case, the court says specifically listen, having six lawyers, six additional lawyers in this case, that would make hearings really untenable because there'd be too many lawyers standing up and making objections and saying that's my witness or I get that I didn't prepare that person and so those six lawyers, they can help in the background, but they don't get to be counsel of record. You have to stay as counsel of record. And the court makes the point that this case has gone on forever. It's a 16 year old case and one of the experts who was going to testify in the habeas appeal is now deceased. One of the attorneys at the underlying trial has cancer and the court says quote this case is getting too stale at this point. We've got to continue with it and we're going to continue with it absent another reason other than what you've already told me.
Speaker 1:
And and then the court gets in, kind of to the management of the capital resource projects office. Court says the lawyer says We've got a very small office, there's only three lawyers here and so there's not somebody else that I can transition this case to in my office. And, by the way, these capital habeas cases they require that you have two lawyers working on it. And the government in fact has three lawyers who are counsel of record. And the judge says, hey, maybe the capital resource project shouldn't be taking on new capital cases you can't get out of. You can't be taking on new cases if you've got this backlog of old cases you can't clear through and you should be working harder to get all the way through this case and clear it off of the docket. And so, at the end of the day, if you I think a fair reading of this transcript Is really that the court is annoyed with how long this case is taken and perhaps Sees this as a delay tactic, be knowing that if there's another lawyer that subs in, that lawyer is gonna need some time to get up to speed on the 200,000 files.
Speaker 1:
But the point is this is that that the court is right or is wrong? It's not that the fourth circuit was right or was wrong in Making these decisions. Like, judges are gonna do what judges do, and some judges, especially in the Eastern District of Virginia, we have something called the rocket docket. We're like cases move, they just move, whether you're ready or not. There are no continuances in the Eastern District, alexandria Division, and that's not where this case was, by the way, but judges are gonna do what judges will do.
Speaker 1:
The thing that pisses me off about this case is is there has been no public outcry whatsoever from any of the lawyer wellness groups, from any of the state bar organizations. So Virginia, in 2022, I think, enacted this new rule where, in addition to the 12 credit hours that I have to get and continue illegal education, to continue that I'm still learning about the law every three years, I've got a log one hour of lawyer wellness and, by the way, like my volunteering at coaching, soccer and baseball, doesn't count. My going to the gym five days a week doesn't count. I've got to go sit in a classroom and attend, attend a course on some lawyer or somebody else telling me how to be a better, have better fitness and do better wellness and do goat yoga I don't know what it is.
Speaker 1:
We've enacted these programs and we pay for these studies to say lawyers by and large are depressed or anxious. We commit suicide at super high rates. We get divorced at super high rates. It's a stressful job and something should be done about it. But then we have judges telling lawyers they have to stay in cases Rather than go and care for their mother who's dying of stage 4 cancer Because the ends of justice require it, and nobody at any of the goddamn state bar associations is saying anything. There was not a single amicus brief filed by any of these lawyer wellness people.
Speaker 1:
Now, maybe this comes along with the job, maybe this comes with being a public defender or quasi public defender, whatever this capital resource project is. Those of us who are in private practice, we have the ability to say no to the client whose case is 14 years into litigation, has been handled or fucked up or whatever by six other lawyers before us. We can say no to that as a capital defender. If you don't accept that case, maybe nobody else does, but as lawyers we've got to have each other's backs. And so to have federal government, us government lawyers who are objecting to this woman withdrawing from the case because it's going to take a little bit longer to kill this guy by the death penalty is just crazy to me. And the fact that there's nobody from any bar organization stepping in and there's no public outcry about this is just nuts. What are the bar organizations once you do? Well?
Speaker 1:
In 2019, the Virginia State Bar issued a wellness report outlining all of what they call the occupational risks of being a lawyer, and they broke these risks down into physical, mental and emotional, adaptation and self actualization risks. And the thing is they actually miss the primary risk. So they outlined things like sedentary nature of the work lawyers sit a lot. We work inside right. There are emotional risks, physical demands, educational debt, debt risk, self actualization risk you might lose control of your professional destiny. Like number one. That's complete bullshit. You are always in control of your professional destiny and you could just fucking quit your job and go do something else. Nobody owes you anything. You're always in control. But what's crazy is that the solutions they have to these risks are so bad. Mental and emotional risk description.
Speaker 1:
Educational debt potential effects of educational debt. Law school debt is debilitating. Okay, most law students take out significant debt with an unrealistic and unlikely expectation that will land a high paying job. Practice pointers for individuals in response to that educational debt risk. Perspective law students should study the profession and gain working knowledge of the financial realities before applying to law school. Well, like for most of us, too late. Number two lawyers should prioritize debt repayment. You can't do that if you're not making enough money in your job. Number three consider hiring a financial planner to understand the nature of student loans and what repayment or forgiveness plans make exist. Okay, you could do that, but that's an additional cost on your ledger. How come at no point in those three practice pointers for individual and I'm not leaving any out how come at no point in those three practice pointers is figure out how to get more clients that'll pay you better. That's one way to get rid of your educational debt.
Speaker 1:
Here's another one self actualization risks. The risk described is a values conflict with the client or practice setting potential effects. Lawyers carrying out instructions or practicing in a subject area contrary to their personal beliefs experience cognitive dissonance that can harm not only their practices but also their sense of personal integrity. Practice pointers for individuals compare values espoused by potential employers and practice areas to personal values before committing. How do you do that? Every law firm in America has some stupid set of core values that they don't actually adhere to that they put in their job descriptions and on their website. How do you correlate your core values to your potential employer's core values? And then, how do you have any control over whether you're being asked to do things for clients that you don't actually want to do?
Speaker 1:
Ryan's answer is that, as the lawyer you're in charge, it's okay to say no to clients. It's okay to turn cases down. It's okay to say I'm not the best lawyer for you because I can't do blah, blah, blah. I can't do, I won't do that thing that you want me to do. You do not have an obligation as a lawyer to serve all people, even if it's coming down from your employer. You can get up and quit. The power is yours. That is, of course, unless you're in the Eastern District of Virginia and you're not let out of the case because your mother's dying and the judge is going well. You haven't surrendered your law license. I think you still have an ethical obligation to see this case through to its conclusion, because the six lawyers before you fucked it up and they took too long and I don't want this on my docket anymore.
Speaker 1:
Listen, I don't think there's anybody that goes to law school and gets all the way through law school and is sworn into the bar who doesn't understand that at times, lawyering can be stressful. But I also think that there's not anybody in the profession or at least that there should be very few people in the profession who don't understand that we're also human and that some things need to take precedence over the constantly turning wheels of justice, and one of those things for me is family. I saw somebody we're having this discussion on LinkedIn about this case and somebody said no, lawyer is a profession. It's just like doctors and lawyers and clergy and we have a higher calling to the profession. Oh shit, no, no, your higher calling, your only higher calling, is to your family and yourself, because the reason that lawyers are stressed and depressed and alcoholics and divorced and commit suicide at these super high rates is because the fucking profession tells us that we have to put everybody else first, and I think that's absolutely backwards.
Speaker 1:
And I want to empower you and give you permission to operate outside of that framework and put your family and yourself first. Do you know why? Because that's how we get better results for our clients. That's how we have better teams. That's how we have a better staff. When we're putting our family and ourselves and our staff first and we're prioritizing those things, it results in a better client experience. It results in us having the brain power to think about how do we navigate the choppy waters of our clients case, because we're not worried about our mother, who's at home, dying of cancer.
Speaker 1:
It's crazy that we have to say this out loud in 2023, while the bar is commissioning these goddamn studies on how you should do more yoga, take more deep breaths and put your phone away at 8 o'clock at night. Let's start with the big stuff first. If somebody in your family is dying of cancer, you get excused from a case. We continue the case. It's okay for the case to last a little bit longer. Can the bar get this big stuff first and then we can come back to yoga and diet and exercise and all the things that you want me to do. But it starts top down and it starts with the judiciary.
Speaker 1:
All right, sorry, I'm more fired up than usual because I think this opinion is drop dead stupid. With that said, if you want to build a practice where you put yourself and your family and your team first a couple days left, join us in Orlando. Thursday through Saturday, October 12th to the 14th. Snag your tickets at glmsummitcom and I want to see you there. Peace, guys.