Storied plaintiffs lawyer disbarred over excessive fees

, The National Law Journal

   | 2 Comments

Plaintiffs attorney Stanley Chesley has been disbarred from practicing law in Kentucky, and the move may crimp his ability to practice in Ohio, where his firm, Waite Schneider Bayless & Chesley, is based.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com

What's being said

  • Darren McKinney, American Tort Reform Association, Washington, DC

    Yet another tawdry example of unscrupulous behavior among plaintiffs' lawyers, putting the lie to their collective claim that they live to stick up for the little guy who is supposedly too often victimized by big, bad, greedy corporations. Well, whether it's bribing judges (Dickie Scruggs), rigging securities class actions (Bill Lerach and Mel Weiss), conspiring to gin up fraudulent asbestos claims (Robert Peirce and Louis Raimond), disgracefully stealing from clients (Stan Chesley, et al.) or otherwise abusing and degrading our civil justice system, it seems that plenty of plaintiffs' lawyers are at least as greedy and self-serving as any of the corporate executives they've hyperbolically castigated in the past.

  • joanne denison, atty chicago

    Why are you calling this "excessive fees"? I was very confused by the story. An excess fee is when you bill someone twice, or charge 100 hours instead of a reasonable 50, bill 4000 years per year. That's an excessive fee which is much harder to show. But this case?
    This is just garden variety theft, conversion, fraud and embezzlement. It's utterly sad that these attorneys already received millions of dollars but wanted more.
    Oh you can also add in breach of fiduciary duty. It's more of a "cooking the books" story than an "excessive fee" story. What's interesting is most business owners know very well what they are telling everyone who gets a set of books--the IRS, the wife and the girlfriend. These guys are amazingly incompetent liars.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202593096407

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.