*This is an opinion article, see sources and disclaimer below.*
Attorney Marc Randazza, who was fired by InfoWars’ Alex Jones because a Connecticut judge accused him of “serious misconduct,” is Ryan Homes and NVR Inc., founder Dwight Schar’s attorney. Dwight Schar also chose a corrupt attorney Marc Randazza to represent his Bella Collina in Florida. Randazza has been disciplined by the state bars in four out of the five states he is licensed to practice law. Yet The Florida Bar, President Dori Foster-Morales, Executive Director Joshua E. Doyle, and President-elect Michael G. Tanner, still allow “tainted” Randazza to practice.
Randazza was issued a public reprimand by The Florida Bar on Sept. 3, 2020 DISCIPLINE CASE #201500718 against Marc Randazza. The reprimand was related to his ethical violations in Nevada, where Randazza, as a porn attorney, was sued by the State Bar of Nevada on nine charges of violations. These violations were:
He pled guilty to two of the ethical violations: the bribe and the shady loan.
Randazza (Randazza Legal Group) received a 12 month suspension, but was it enforced? The Florida Bar decided to reprimand Randazza by placing him on a year’s probation. The Referee’s note said that he “did not find persuasive the numerous character letters submitted by the respondent nor the testimony of his character witnesses, who were unfamiliar with the facts surrounding his discipline.” In other words, Randazza tried to cover up the facts with recommendations.
HuffPost writes that “outrageous” Randazza is “curiously chummy” with fascists and racists. Randazza has also represented several Neo-Nazis in court, including Andrew Anglin, who published the address of a Jewish realtor on the Nazi website The Daily Stormer.
But “rude” Randazza was so bad that even conspiracy theorist Alex Jones had to fire him. The InfoWars founder was told by a Connecticut judge that Randazza was “tainted.” The same judge accused Randazza of “serious misconduct.” In addition, Randazza (Randazza Legal Group) lied while filing claims for Jones in the state of Connecticut, where he was not licensed to practice.
Legal registry Avvo rated him 1 out 10 with “extreme caution” because he had received disciplinary action. Several five-star reviews boosted his profile, however, some of them were very long and very poorly written. They also talked about irrelevant points, including “love and respect.”
Marc Radazza was collaborating lately with Florida attorney William Matthews from Shutts & Bowen law firm, attorney James Ryan, attorney David Landis from Mateer Harbert law firm, and appeared in front of judge Karen Jennemann to convince her that First Amendment right of social media can be sold off.
The State Bar of Nevada charged Randazza with alleged violations of Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct 1.4 (Communication), 1.7 (Conflict of Interest: Current Clients), 1.8 (Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules), 1.10 (Imputation of Conflicts of Interest), 1.15 (Safekeeping Property), 1.16 (Declining or Terminating Representation), 2.1 (Advisor), 5.6 (Restrictions on Right to Practice), and 8.4 (Misconduct). On July 23, 2018, an automatic appeal was filed with the Nevada Supreme Court regarding a guilty plea and disciplinary recommendation made by the Nevada Disciplinary Panel. The Disciplinary Panel had recommended a one-year suspension, stayed for 18 months, with the requirement that he avoid subsequent ethics complaints for the 18 months following entry of the order, complete 20 hours of CLE classes, and pay the costs associated with the proceedings within 30 days. The plea and disciplinary recommendation were only for the violations of Rules 1.8 and 5.6; the remaining charges were dismissed.
On January 14, 2019, the Arizona State Bar issued a public reprimand and a suspension based upon some of the misconduct that took place in Nevada. A new disciplinary case was opened in Arizona and California based upon further information and documentation of alleged misconduct by Randazza, to include allegedly lying in court documents related to the Alex Jones case in Connecticut. However, beyond the reciprocal disciplinary proceedings, Randazza was not charged with any new violations and the Arizona suspension was not put into effect.
On May 2, 2019, in the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County, Massachusetts, in a state bar disciplinary proceeding styled In re: Mark John Randazza, Case No. BD-2018-110, a hearing was conducted, which included an additional alleged ethical violation that the bar counsel claimed the State Bar of Nevada ignored. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court did not find this additional ethical violation existed and issued a stayed suspension of the same term as Nevada. The Florida Supreme Court conducted a similar reciprocal disciplinary proceeding; it found no aggravating factors, with the Referee finding that there was “no clear and convincing evidence to suggest that anything [Randazza] may have done on behalf of his other clients was actually adverse to” his complaining clients. Thus, Randazza was given a reprimand and one-year probation in Florida.
Randazza has gained attention for handling high-profile First Amendment cases and for his defense of the adult entertainment field. Randazza (Randazza Legal Group) was named one of the Top 50 newsmakers of the adult entertainment industry by XBIZ World Magazine for the year 2011.
Some of these links below have been the source for this article and others are for you to read and decide. Marc Randazza never opposed them, responded to them or had the court take them down. Therefore they can be assumed to be valid. Read them all and decide for yourself.
As Randazza himself said: “Be very careful anytime you have somebody trying to stifle someone else’s free speech. When you hear speech that bothers you, you hear speech that repulses you, speech that disgust you, I I think your first instinct should be to protect that, and then fighting and then debate against it. But if your beliefs are so fragile that they can’t stand in opposition to something that you find abhorrent, then maybe you need to look at your own beliefs and modified them.”
Randazza will try to argue that he is not corrupt. By saying that Randazza is corrupt, no one is accusing him of a crime, necessarily. They are simply saying that he is a dishonest attorney with a very high number of bar complaints in every state that he practices law. Aside, this is the opinion of this writer and this article as well as probably many others in the legal community.
*This is an opinion, impression article presenting a point of view to be considered and there are other opinions regarding the individuals and entities mentioned in this article. You may search other information and find other opinions.*