A veteran is in a 13 year battle with the New Jersey Supreme Court. He alleges a cover up and wants
justice to prevail, they think he’s a nut suffering from PTSD who shouldn’t be taken seriously. Who’s right?
So what’s the story? In this first part, I will address the facts as presented by John
“Jack” Cunningham. Cunningham is a disabled Vietnam veteran who served with honor and was honorably discharged.
He does suffer from PTSD and is currently on disability because of it. PTSD doesn’t make a person unable to tell truth
from conspiracy. It’s also not something others should use to discredit and slander.
hired the law firm of Maynard & Truland, LLC to help him with a legal matter – a divorce. He signed an Agreement
to Provide Legal Services and gave them a retainer check. He became unhappy with the timeliness of the representation he received.
This lack of timeliness cause a default to be entered against him in the divorce, an action that the firm took weeks to advise
him had happened. It was so egregious that Cunningham’s ex-wife offered her written statement to help him defend himself
in later Court documents. She stated that despite having an attorney present, Mr. Cunningham seemed to be representing himself.
The kicker? Cunningham was billed for this questionable representation.
He complained to the firm
and the State Ethics Committee. What he was not aware of was that a partner at that firm, Robert Correale, who had showed
up at his divorce arbitration but was utterly unprepared and never spoke, was on said Ethics Committee. Correale sent a certification
to the Supreme Court Office of Attorney Ethics in defense of his firm. This certification conveniently left out key facts,
and per Mr. Cunningham, outright lied about others, and had no supporting documentation. Supporting documentation is a commonly
accepted practice, and the absence of any throws most defenses into question.
This ethics violation
was assigned for investigation to the committee that Correale was Vice-Chair. In other words, the complaint about Correale
and his firm was to be investigated by Correale. A clear violation of attorney ethics as pertains to conflict of interest.
Robert Correale, Cunningham alleges, used his sphere of influence as a sitting member of the Ethics Committee, to
block his allegations of legal malpractice and other ethics violations. This was even after Correale resigned from the committee.
Other issues, such as conveniently disappearing court recordings before transcription, and openly mocking Cunningham in Court
documents, were not unusual. He also billed him for more than his retainer and sued Cunningham for that balance when he refused
Cunningham went on a letter writing campaign that has lasted 13 years. It took the response
of Governor James McGreevey to get the Office of Attorney Ethics to admit that, if Correale’s committee carried out
the investigation there would be a conflict of interest. It was only then that the investigation was transferred to another
committee outside Correale’s direct area of responsibility. Apparently, though, not outside of his sphere of influence.
Cunningham continued his campaign to see that Correale was charged for his ethics violations. 13 years later, this
Part 2 of this will address the issues in more depth, but I certainly
question the lack of appropriate response from the law firm, McGreevey administration, or from the Christie administration.
If all Cunningham’s allegations are true, and he does have plenty of written evidence to back himself up, why is this
being buried? If the firm messed up, why not just admit it?
Could it be that it’s easier
to just cast the complainant as a crazy Vietnam Vet who shouldn’t be taken seriously? No damages, it just quietly goes
away. The problem is they underestimated this veteran. He isn’t going quietly!
to come (watch for part 2) …