NATALIE F. BAIRD, Dropped case because of disagreement with family member after having received full payment TAMPA, Florida

On September 20, 2005, my niece Vicki and Natalie Baird, Esq. entered into a signed contract for representation in a divorce matter.Upon taking the case, initially Ms. Baird was to have consulted with the opposing attorney to expedite having the renewal my niece's military ID card issue resolved.

Three months later, my niece was without her medication and basic needs because her husband refused to renew her ID card to enter onto the military base.My niece, being without her medication was prone to having seizures and worst an aneurism. She requested I contact Ms Baird on her behalf as to why a continuous delay in renewal, regarding the ID card.

I called Ms. Baird's office, reaching her voice mail, questioning why it had taken three (3) months to bring about relief and if there wasn't any progress on this particular issue and seemingly remiss in the handling of the case, more specifically, "dragging her feet!" adding I would personally seek the aid of the Ethics Committee and/or the US Attorney's office.

Apparently upon hearing my message, she called my niece informing her of the intent to withdraw as counsel, and she did, using the excuse, I had threatened her office. I merely suggested in my representation, of seeking outside assistance if she did not or could not realize the urgency of the medication issue.

Ms. Baird was unprofessional and unethical in her decision to withdraw from counsel. The contract was signed between she and my niece, my phone call should not have become the impetus to discontinue representation, as I was not part or parcel of the signed agreement!

As a licensed attorney in the state of Florida, if Ms. Baird is permitted to go unpunished for her unethical behavior, this act of hers' will undoubtedly further besmirch the legal practice and those that represent their clients honorably.

If a fair, and impartial investigation is to be conducted, have Ms. Baird produce the tape she supposedly has, with me making harmful threats to her personally and to her firm. If needed for voice comparison, I'm willing to forward at my expense, a tape with my voice.

Second opinions and seeking guidance are acceptable in all professions; none of us were given the right to play God! If she proposes to be that sensitive in the questioning of her handling of matters, the pursuit of a JD degree was probably her wrong choice.

Personally, I'm requesting an official sanctioning of Ms. Baird and the return of/or a reasonable portion of the fee my niece was charged, and paid in full, up front. All though the matter of a threat was investigated by the police, nothing was regarded as a threat, moreso concern for a family member.

The matter was taken before the Ethics Committee and as expected they ruled in Natalie Bairds favor. She retained the full payment as to my knowledge.

Frank
Lawnside, New Jersey
U.S.A.