Leaderboard 728 X 90

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Confronted with his vile, nasty, and prejudicial letter to the judge in our eviction case, Missouri attorney David Shuler (my brother) seems to be at a loss for words


David Shuler
How did my brother, Missouri lawyer David Shuler, react when confronted about the flagrantly prejudicial letter he wrote to the judge in our eviction case -- the one that resulted in a Greene County deputy assaulting my wife, Carol, and leaving her with a shattered left arm?

Perhaps the best way to answer that question -- and to illustrate how lawyers of dubious character can act -- is to follow a brief timeline:

(1) On August 25, 2015 -- two days before our court hearing in the eviction case -- David sent me an e-mail in which he made a number of false statements regarding matters involving Carol and me. He said the opposing party, Trent Cowherd, had asked him for assistance in serving us with legal documents. Aside from that, David stated that he did not want to be involved in our business, that he had no hard feelings toward me, and he wished me the best.

(2) I responded the same day, correcting a couple of false assertions he had made and asking him about a document, his letter to Judge Kelly Halford Rose, that I had seen in the court file. (See letter at the end of this post.) From my e-mail:

One final point: On the subject of serving documents, would you please serve me a copy of the letter you wrote to the judge in the Cowherd case? I've only been able to scan it at this point, but I would like to have a copy -- and I believe I'm due to be served with a copy. Again, I haven't digested it fully, but my initial reaction was that it was one of the nastiest, most vile pieces of correspondence I've ever read. In fact, I can't imagine what would possess an attorney to write such an improper and prejudicial ex parte letter at any point, much less the day before a case is to be heard. It should be grounds for the judge's recusal, but I'm sure she will ignore any calls for that. If my memory is correct, there is a line in there stating that your intent (and I'm paraphrasing) is to do everything possible to ensure that Cowherd regains possession. That sounds like your goal is not to represent Mom, but to help Cowherd and hurt me and Carol -- no matter what wrongdoing Cowherd has committed in this matter. I'll be blunt with you, David -- that letter, based on a quick reading, wreaks of spite, meanness, ill will, backstabbing, vindictiveness, and more. And it appears that these feelings toward me have been present in you for a long time. I don't think they suddenly arose when you sat down to write that letter. Why do you have such feelings toward a brother who has tried to treat you with respect and kindness and support? Only you can answer that question. But if I had written a letter like that about anyone -- much less my brother -- I would hope someone would encourage me to set aside a little time for self-reflection and maybe professional help. That letter tells me something is not right in your heart and mind. If I could help you with it, I would, but it's probably not my place -- especially since the vitriol is directed at me.

Just in case David could not grasp all that was revealed in his letter, I decided to spell it out for him:

I've written way too much, but I will conclude with this: You state that you don't want to be involved in my business, that you have no hard feelings. But your letter to the court says something altogether different. It says that you have extremely hard feelings -- for reasons I can't comprehend -- and it says you do intend to stay involved in my business. You are correct, it seems, when you say you no longer want to be involved with efforts to help me. But your letter makes it clear that you intend to go out of your way to help people who want to hurt me. You have encouraged me to seek professional help regarding psychological and emotional issues. The content and tone of your letter suggests that you might need such intervention more than I ever have.

BTW, please serve me with a copy of your letter to the judge. My understanding is that I'm due that under the law.

Did David serve me with a copy of the letter, even after I had asked him at least three times? Nope. Did he have any substantive response to my message? Nope. Here is his only reply:

I acknowledge receipt of your e-mail. Thank you.

Just to make sure David understood that he had an obligation to Carol and me, as parties in a case where he had written an ex parte letter to the judge, I added this, acknowledging that I was aware he had copied my other siblings and sisters-in-law with his e-mail -- and I had copied them with information about his letter:

Are you going to forward me a copy of the letter you filed with the court, as requested in my e-mail reply to you, copied below? As far as I'm concerned, you certainly are welcome to share it with any family members you've copied here. In fact, I think they should see it.

David's response? Crickets . . .

How many ways did Missouri attorney David Shuler lie to me, his brother? Let's count the ways:

(1) He says he does not want to be involved in our business. The letter below shows he very much is involving himself in our business.

(2) He says he holds no hard feelings toward me. The letter below shows he is riddled with hard feelings for me, none of which are justified.

(3) He says he wishes me the best. Apparently, one way he wishes me the best is by doing his best to ensure that I am homeless.

(4) Finally, David says in his e-mail that "unless absolutely necessary, you will have no further contact from me."

David stayed true to his word on the that last one -- if you don't count the 10 e-mails he sent me since that date, plus the petition he helped my other brother file, seeking to have Carol and I declared wards of the state.

Does law school cause brain damage in some people? I swear, I used to think David was a wonderful brother and an all-around good guy -- and Carol and I never have done anything to cause him to hold such ill will toward us. So, why does he clearly have it in for us?

I have no idea. But I sure don't recognize the author of that letter -- and I would say the author has something haywire in his attic.



16 comments:

Anonymous said...

Your brother sounds like the type who would happily stab a person between the shoulder blades.

Anonymous said...

Most baffling law-related letter I've ever read. I've read it several times and still can't figure what he was trying to accomplish.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if your mother knows what he's doing in her name.

legalschnauzer said...

@11:27 --

Good question. I wouldn't be surprised, either way.

Anonymous said...

The guy admits to the court that he's not actually working for his client, but for a third party. That is mind-bending. Dumbest thing I think I've ever seen a lawyer write.

Anonymous said...

Did your mother know this letter was written? Did she receive a copy of it? She needs to be aware of it because it implicates her. It indicates this action was taken on her behalf. If young Mr. Shuler did this without her knowledge, that's a pretty serious attorney-client problem.

legalschnauzer said...

@11:36 --

All good questions. I don't have the answers at the moment, but I intend to find out.

Anonymous said...

Young Mr. Shuler doesn't seem to have much regard for rules of the Missouri Bar. That can be problematic for a young lawyer, like young Mr. Shuler.

Anonymous said...

Your brother and mother both should have been hit with sanctions for this. The legal profession already looks bad in the public's eye, and this makes it look even worse.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure you know this already, but it's clear your brother is working on someone's behalf -- and it certainly isn't yours.

legalschnauzer said...

Yes, I'm aware of that. Only question is if it's someone from Missouri or Alabama or both. I intend to find out.

Anonymous said...

Your mother probably is proud of having raised a lawyer, but she should be ashamed of this POS.

legalschnauzer said...

@2:46 --

Speaking of my mother, she had one of the most interesting comments about all the abuse directed at Carol and me. After I came to Missouri for what I thought was a temporary visit -- after being thrown in jail and having our house stolen in Birmingham -- my mother said the following regarding my blog: "Oh, Roger, you shouldn't have named names!"

That's a ridiculous statement from a journalism standpoint. You can't write a meaningful story without naming names, and she seems to have forgotten that I actually have a degree from a pretty good journalism school, and I know what I'm doing from that standpoint. But her statement suggests 2-3 things to me:

(1) Someone has told her why Carol and I have been cheated out of our jobs and home and thrown in jail, etc. -- and she's been told, at least in a general way, who is responsible.

(2) My mother might not remember the specific names -- and perhaps she never was told -- but someone in Missouri, in my family, knows those names.

(3) Best I can tell, the only person that could be is my brother, David. My mother would have no reason to make that statement if she hadn't been told something about what really happened to us and who caused it. David is, by far, the most likely person to have told her.

Anonymous said...

Your brother comes across as a spoiled little puss who needs several spankings he should have gotten in childhood.

legalschnauzer said...

@3:55 --

Well, he was the baby and was treated with kid gloves compared to the rest of us. Not sure if he ever did a household chore in his life.

Itsmehoney said...

I have read your blog for a long time, Roger and for all those years you have consistently displayed a strength of character that is admirable. I feel quite certain that others recognize that also, and they also recognize your brother's lack of character. I doubt he has any respect in his professional circle.