« Skeptics’ Circle | Main | Rob Lancaster sees Sylvia Browne »

June 23, 2008


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

As an attorney I feel vindicated by this decision. It's idiots like Shoemaker that give the legal profession a bad name.

As a sanction from this court, Clifford J. Shoemaker is ordered to attend within three months, a continuing legal education program on ethics

Bit of a contradiction in terms, eh! Imaginary-Ambulance chasing scumbag of a lawyer attending ethics classes.
One for the good guys, yes, but it would have been appropriate to fine him and revoke his license to practice. Doesn't he even have to pay the defendant's legal costs?

The decision was issued by a federal judge who has no power to revoke a state issued attorney license. Shoemaker may face further sanctions, not limited to suspension (probably not complete revocation) after his misconduct is evaluated by Virginia Professional Conduct Committee.

Furthermore, the judge didn't grant attorney's fees because none were asked for in the original order to show cause.

In addition, Seidel was not the defendant in the case.

I was one of the bloggers named in Shoemaker's subpoena, which is my dog in the hunt.

You may find Seidel's two latest posts of interest.


Numerous decisions issued over the twenty year history of the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) document the extent to which the limits on attorney compensation have been tested by practitioners seeking remuneration from its taxpayer-financed coffers. The following review summarizes decisions involving the recently-sanctioned VICP specialist Clifford Shoemaker, Esq. -- a central instigator of the campaign to convince the public of the speculative, scientifically unsupported hypothesis that a significant number of cases of autism result from vaccine injury, co-founder of the Institute for Chronic Illnesses, and a founding member its Institutional Review Board, which sponsors and provides ethical oversight of medical research and experimentation on autistic children and adolescents conducted by his long-time colleague Dr. Mark Geier.


The potential for procedural and billing improprieties by Vaccine Injury Compensation Program petitioners’ attorneys — especially those representing numerous clients with similar, speculative claims — is made painfully evident in Special Master Denise Vowell’s recent fee and cost decision in Carrington v. HHS, Case 99-495V (Fed.Cl.Spec.Mstr., June 18, 2008) (unpublished), posted to the U.S. Court of Federal Claims website three days ago.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search site