Whoever said "All press is good press" clearly never read this case.
It's about Simi Valley attorney Robert N. Greenberg. He's not only the president of the Hairclub for Men, but he's also a client. Which is to say that he's both the attorney and client in this appeal, which concerns a $2800 sanction and fee award imposed against him in his marital dissolution against his former spouse.
Greenberg appeals the sanction, hoping to get it reversed, or perhaps to at least his require his ex-wife to spend to time, money and aggravation in responding. But not only doesn't she respond, and not only does he lose, but here's what the Court of Appeal writes:
"Abraham Lincoln once said, 'He who represents himself has a fool for a client.' Here, the client is an attorney who represented himself in the trial court. He now represents himself on appeal. He is unschooled on the basics of appellate law, suggesting that Lincoln's observation applies on appeal. We understand that emotions run high in family law litigation and that this may cloud the judgment of a party. But this does not excuse the filing of a 'creative' (i.e. misleading or incomplete or inaccurate) income and expense declaration; or perjury, as referenced by the trial court; or the filing of a frivolous appeal."
So let's recount what the Court of Appeal says about him. That he's a fool. That he's unschooled on even the basics of appellate law. He fudges court documents. That he commits perjury. And that's just in the opening paragraph of the opinion.
The rest of the opinion spells out these conclusions. In a published opinion, no less. Adding, for good measure, details about the facts of Greenberg's alleged perjury: that he lied when he said he didn't have a sexual relationship with someone when he totally did (who, coincidentally, was involved in the dispute that gave rise to the sanction award).
Who does Greenberg think he is? A former president? ("I did not have sexual relations with that woman.") Hope he at least said it in a Southern drawl.
Oh, one more thing. The Court of Appeal not only affirms the sanction and fee awards, not only insults Greenberg repeatedly, and not only recounts his not-so-stellar attributes -- all the while publishing the whole thing -- but then it ends up by reporting him to the State Bar. An entity that already censured Greenberg for the underlying perjury.
Not good press. Not good press at all.
Sometimes you've got to let things go. Sometimes getting an outside view from another attorney does you a world of good.
