Nicolle T. Phair, a lawyer based in Sanford, North Carolina, recently found herself in the hot seat before a disciplinary commission as she defended her use of a controversial strategy during a criminal client’s arraignment. Phair’s actions have raised questions about ethical conduct within the legal profession.
The incident in question occurred during a June 2022 hearing in Lee County, North Carolina, where Phair was representing a client facing charges related to a hit-and-run accident. According to a disciplinary complaint filed by the North Carolina State Bar’s Disciplinary Hearing Commission on June 30, 2023, Phair took an unusual approach to her client’s defense.
Shortly before the arraignment hearing commenced, Phair requested that her client leave the courtroom and wait in the lobby. She then proceeded to an adjacent courtroom, where she encountered a child-support litigant. Phair asked the unsuspecting litigant to stand beside her in the courtroom, seemingly as a stand-in for her criminal client, to test whether witnesses could identify him.
As the arraignment began, Phair left the fake client at the defense table, and when the judge initiated discussions about a potential plea agreement, she declined, explaining that she believed the witnesses wouldn’t be able to identify her actual client.
Find your next superstar hire with BCG Attorney Search – submit your job openings now.
The situation took a turn during a lunch recess when the prosecution and the judge realized that the individual at the defense table might not be the real criminal defendant. When questioned by the judge, Phair eventually disclosed her unconventional tactic.
In addition to the fake client incident, Phair also faced allegations of providing inconsistent explanations for her tardiness to a hearing, reportedly arriving two hours late. In her response to the disciplinary complaint, Phair expressed her remorse for her lateness and attributed it to a genuine emergency.
Phair is now appealing to a disciplinary hearing panel to consider her dedication to zealously representing her clients and her overall cooperation with clients and the court. She is seeking a resolution that would either dismiss the ethics complaint or impose discipline that would allow her to continue practicing law.
At the time of reporting, Phair had not responded to requests for comment from the ABA Journal.
This case has sparked a significant debate within the legal community about the boundaries of acceptable legal strategies and the ethical responsibilities of attorneys. The legal profession strongly emphasizes the duty of lawyers to provide zealous representation to their clients while adhering to ethical guidelines.
Phair’s actions raise concerns about whether her tactics crossed ethical boundaries. In criminal cases, it is essential to uphold the integrity of the legal process and ensure that defendants receive fair and just treatment. Substituting a fake client in court may undermine the trust and credibility of the legal system.
The disciplinary commission will likely carefully consider the facts of the case, including Phair’s explanation and her commitment to cooperating with clients and the court. The outcome of this case could have implications not only for Phair’s legal career but also for the broader legal community, as it may set a precedent for acceptable conduct during legal proceedings.
As the case unfolds, it serves as a reminder to legal professionals about the importance of upholding ethical standards and maintaining the trust of clients, judges, and the public. The legal profession’s reputation relies on the integrity and professionalism of its practitioners, and cases like this one prompt discussions about the boundaries of acceptable legal strategies.
Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.
