Moore County’s DA vs. Josh Stein. (*DING. DING.*)

Michael Hardin, the district attorney for Moore and Hoke counties, believes he has the current attorney general (and presumptive Democrat gubernatorial nominee) dead-to-rights in an apparent conflict of interest – playing both sides in a lawsuit brought by leftists against the State of North Carolina.  

Hardin has taken his concern rather forcefully to Josh Stein and his staff. He’s even doubling down by filing a complaint with the state bar alleging conflict of interest against the sitting attorney general.  

According to the Hardin complaint:

[…] Specifically, DA Hardin contends the Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct:

Under Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest: Current Clients; The Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional conduct by causing the District Attorneys (including DA Hardin) to be sued. The Attorney General was a named party to a lawsuit and used the District Attorneys as a defense thereby causing them to be named in the lawsuit and allowing the Attorney General to be dismissed from the lawsuit. He is required by the Rules of Professional conduct to seek written consent of the client to continue his representation, which he has failed and refused to do.

Under Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest; Current Clients; the Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional conduct by consenting and stipulating to the District Attorneys (including DA Hardin) being added to a lawsuit, without any of the District Attorneys’ written consent.

Under Rule 1.7 Conflict of Interest; Current Clients; the Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional conduct by making decisions regarding how to proceed on behalf of DA Hardin in the currentlawsuit based on the interests of other clients he represents in the same lawsuit, without obtaining written consent of DA Hardin.

Under Rule 1.8 Conflicts of Interest of Current Clients Special Rules; the Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct by using information relating to the representation of a client to the disadvantage of the client without giving informed consent.

Under Rule 1.8 Conflicts of Interest of Current Clients Special Rules; the Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional conduct by representing two or more clients in a lawsuit and participating in an aggregate settlement of the claims of or against the client, without the informed consent of each of the clients in writing.

Under Rule 1.6 Confidentiality of Information; the Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct by revealing information obtained during the professional relationship.

UnderRule 1.4: Communication; the Attorney General has violated the Rules of Professional conduct by failing to properly communicate with his client. It is alleged that he has not promptly informed the clients of circumstances with respect to which the client’s informed consent is required. It is alleged that he has not reasonably consulted with the clients, kept the clients reasonably informed about the status of the matter, promptly complied with reasonable requests for information, nor consulted with the clients. Reasonable communication between the lawyer and the client is necessary for the clients to effectively participate in the representation.

[…]

Mike Hardin doesn’t play around.  He’s one of the few local prosecutors I know of who has won election in the face of withering opposition by the local bar.  Crime victims, taxpayers, and lawmen got behind him in his initial run for office and they’ve yet to to be disappointed.