My compliments on your story. I thought it was well-written and actually quite fair-minded. It looks like a successful piece of journalism.

Name withheld

-------------------------------------------

Seaborne ‘exposé’ reports gossip

I have just read your story about a local attorney (Ellen Seaborne). It troubles me greatly, because up until now I have thought (Editor Dan Frazier’s) writing to be cogent, well documented, and coherent. That cannot be said for your "exposé." I have met Ms. Seaborne, which is why my attention was immediately drawn to the article purporting to be about her. Reading it, I soon began to wonder what on earth this woman could have done to (Dan) to result in such vituperation based on such questionable evidence.

Your "statistics" are so incomplete as to be meaningless. Seaborne's filing of a complaint against another attorney, as you say attorneys are required by the Bar to do, was described by you as vindictiveness on her part, while the other attorneys who also filed complaints, you say, were merely talked into doing so by Seaborne. Do you know any lawyers who are that weakminded?

Before accusing another person of wrongdoing, Dan, you should gather complete and factual evidence — not decide at the outset that the person is guilty and then try to shape innuendo, gossip and slander into a pretense of fact. In my opinion, your "exposé" reflects much more critically on you than on your victim.

Joyce Browning

Flagstaff

-------------------------------------------

Seaborne story laughable

I am writing in response to the crucifixion of attorney Ellen Seaborne in the March issue of your newspaper. I would like to preface my comments by stating that I in no way support Ms. Seaborne, nor do I find it impossible that an attorney could be unethical in her dealings with clients. However, I did find your treatment of the issue to be biased to the point of being laughable. Clearly, (Tea Party Editor Dan Frazier) has a vendetta against Ellen Seaborne, and has used such motivation to prompt a public crusade against her, as evidenced by the indication that more articles about Seaborne are to follow. It is ironic that the Flagstaff Tea Party, which prides itself on its thorough coverage of issues and rejection of corporate-controlled media would present such an agenda-laden, slanted portrayal of a local businesswoman.

It is true that the number of complaints filed against Seaborne is staggering at first glance, but it is the duty of responsible media to present multiple sides of issues, refusing to rely solely on initial appearances, and corresponding emotional reactions. What about the possibility that Seaborne represents an inherently more volatile client-base, from which other local attorneys shy away?

What about the fact that the majority of complaints raised against Seaborne were dropped by the Arizona Bar? Last I checked, here in the United States, accusations are not equivalent with truth, lest they possess something called evidence. Without evidence, such accusations are flimsy at best, and when used as firepower against defendants by the local media, present one of the highest forms of journalistic irresponsibility.

Also distasteful in your piece on Seaborne is the detailing of feelings held by her frustrated clientele. Clearly, by only giving a voice to those clients who are dissatisfied (and no doubt lost their cases), a balanced perspective on Seaborne becomes impossible. At the risk of sounding crass, it is irrelevant that former

Seaborne client Diana Royce says “her experience with Seaborne caused her to consider suicide.” Blaming an attorney for the deteriorating mental health of one former client is an incredible example of poor logic, unfounded evidence, and above all else, unethical reporting. It is equally likely that Royce’s psychological instability prompted her to make outrageous accusations against her former attorney. This possibility, however, is completely ignored in your article, as the Tea Party would clearly prefer slinging mud than finding truth.

Reading this article was very disappointing to me. While I acknowledge the obvious possibility that such complaints against Seaborne are in fact legitimate, I am disturbed that the Tea Party would fail to present any alternative explanations that do not coexist so well with the editor’s apparent crusade. I hope that in the future Flagstaff’s only “other voice” will refuse to give in to such juvenile, sensationalistic temptations, and opt instead for presenting a balanced look at local concerns.

Alex Cogswell

Flagstaff

-------------------------------------------

Use of ‘heavyset’ riles reader

My first read through stopped me cold when you wrote about your investigation of (attorney) Ellen Seaborne suggesting,"an alarming pattern of dishonesty ... ” I certainly don't know the law regarding slander but was instantly curious if Ms. Seaborne might have issues with your column. Regardless, when I read your description of Seaborne, as "The heavyset Seaborne ...” I thought that I might want to write this letter.

What part of good journalism includes personal descriptions that may deter focus from what one says to how one looks?  The information presented was disturbing enough. Your editorial inclusions in your front-page news article make me question the focus and purpose of your worthy venture.  I don’t care if Seaborne is 58 and am not at all interested if her desk is “large {and} polished.” I should have been more focused on the pattern you found based on facts discovered and presented. 

Please continue your valuable work and write with clear purpose so that your readers don’t have to stop and wonder … what was that all about!  When you go off from the center of an issue, keep it on pages 2 and 3 where your feelings are expected to be found.

Ann Garrambone

Flagstaff

-------------------------------------------

Court reporter impressed

Although I have heard of Flagstaff Tea Party through other sources, this month's issue is the first I have actually seen. Your front page article caught my eye and by the time I was through reading, I was thoroughly impressed. Not only by the obvious time you devoted to the subject matter, but by the conclusions to which you came.

I worked in the court reporting business for three years so had some indirect experience with Ellen Seaborne. I cannot attest one way or the other as to her legal expertise and client relationships, but I do know that I was not impressed with her as one human being to another. That "grandmother" nice personality was too sweet to my liking.

I'm not in any position to contribute to the ongoing story, but I hope you will continue to explore her history and bring it to light. There also is another attorney in town who deserves equal treatment. However, I'm not on a witch hunt of any sort.

I look forward to further editions of FTP. Keep up the good work!

Anonymous

-------------------------------------------

Seaborne story painful

It was hard reading the article (about attorney Ellen Seaborne), but I am very glad you wrote it. I pray that something will be done about her. I also pray that you and those of us in the article do not pay too high of a price in the fall out. Either way, this needed to come to light and I am glad you had the courage to do so.

Diana Royce

Colorado

Editor’s note: Diana Royce was mentioned in the story about Ellen Seaborne. She is a former Seaborne client whose complaint against Seaborne was dismissed by the Arizona State Bar.

-------------------------------------------

Seaborne client dissatisfied

I was somewhat off put by the mean-spirited attack on Ellen Seaborne in your March 2002 issue of Flagstaff Tea Party.  I am a lawyer myself, although no fan of lawyer advertising or fat-cat attorneys.  But the viciousness of the piece left me wondering whether (Tea Party Editor Dan Frazier had a personal vendetta against Ms. Seaborne.  Calling Ms. Seaborne "Flagstaff's most advertised family lawyer", making note of "her large polished desk" and gratuitously making note of her physical stature, all detracted from the seriousness of the investigative piece.

That said, I would like to praise the article for accurately capturing the essence of my experience as the husband of one of Ms. Seaborne's disaffected former clients.  Ms. Seaborne did initially come across as caring, but sure enough, once our initial retainer was in her pocket, that was the last contact we ever had with her.

She disregarded our explicit instructions, broke her personal promises to us, refused to reply to our increasingly desperate attempts to have her look out for the best interests of our children, and when we desperately sought some communication with her, filed a Motion to Withdraw as counsel, without even having the courtesy of serving us with a copy.  We first found out that she no longer represented my wife when we received a copy of the Order from the court. 

We considered filing a Bar complaint, but in the end, chose to chalk it up to just another bad experience with the legal profession. Given the apparent results of the Bar investigation, I'm sorry that we didn't tell our story sooner, but it appears that it would not have had much impact on the outcome.  The number one cause of bar complaints is the failure of lawyers to adequately communicate with their clients.

In our case, Ms. Seaborne raised this frequent inadequacy to whole new heights.   According to your article, Ms. Seaborne estimates that "only about 1 percent of her cases had resulted in complaints that led to a bar investigation."  I would hazard a guess that another 10 percent of her clients, like us, considered such possible action, but wisely chose to save their energy.  In short, I commend you for your investigative work, thank you for making Ms. Seaborne's inadequacies public knowledge, but advise you to avoid the vitriol in the future.

Lee Edmond

Flagstaff

-------------------------------------------

Family law story commendable

Regarding the article about Family law in Flagstaff. I wish to commend you on your work product. You have taken a very emotional situation and reduced it to the "nuts and bolts." Rather than engaging in inflammatory journalism, you were able to present the story using verifiable facts which you have collected and presented. As I am sure you have found, justice is an elusive concept. Your article shows that you have a good understanding of the concepts and of what is correct in this instance.

Every day a woman is injured by the "legal abuse syndrome" where vulnerable people become lost in the maze of legal process. Only if we stand up to it can it be stopped. Thanks for taking the time to look into this situation and publish a noteworthy article.

John G. Gliege

Flagstaff

Editor’s note: John Gliege is an attorney who was quoted in the story about Ellen Seaborne. He recently filed a complaint against Seaborne with the Arizona State Bar.

-------------------------------------------

Satisfied Seaborne client

This letter is written with regard to your story on Ellen Seaborne. I feel that your article is biased.

I came to Flagstaff in 1999 and began looking for a lawyer a few weeks prior to my custody trial. Legal Aid would not help stating that custody cases "take too long." The third lawyer I contacted was Ellen Seaborne. This was months after I had been representing myself and was at my wits' end with stress and was a week before my trial. When I walked into Mrs. Seaborne's office, I saw a sign on her desk saying "Soroptimists." Soroptimists in Flagstaff have given lots of time, money and help to Sharon Manor, where I had lived for a year. I immediately felt like this woman would help me.

She told me that I could never afford her fees and took my case pro bono. She organized my paperwork, hundreds of documents, and took my case. She represented me at my trial. I retained full physical and legal custody of my daughter.

You state in your article that Ellen Seaborne has shafted people. Yet, Mrs. Seaborne helped me immensely, for free. I felt that Mrs. Seaborne was a fabulous attorney and would hire her again at full expense if another situation arose. To cloud her reputation in a small town like Flagstaff seems like a political attack. I agree with Mrs. Seaborne that she receives more complaints because of the nature of her practice. It is highly emotional. These are people's children we are talking about.

Perhaps you should do some investigative reporting on Judge Fred Newton or some of the other judges in the Coconino County court system who overlook fundamental grievances and allow trials like this to drag on, at the detriment of parents trying to do their best to survive and raise their children. Coconino County Court holds onto our lives like a poker hand. Only, when they fold, it is we who suffer the consequences. What is the real cause of these people's anguish? Is it really Ellen Seaborne? I think your level of investigation should begin to include the custody cases at the Coconino County Court and the judges making decisions on the lives of children, rather than attacking the messenger.

Kelli Holloran
Flagstaff
-------------------------------------------

Seaborne practices no big deal

Regarding your diatribe against Ellen Seaborne and Associates, this is the sorriest excuse for a piece of journalism I have ever seen. You savagely pillory this attorney with vague, unsupported information, opinions, hearsay, gossip, and unattributed statements by alleged disgruntled clients and others, without full disclosure of the circumstances and both sides of the story. You disguise with false names the sources you quote. The reader wonders whether you just made up these statements inasmuch as you do not attribute them.

You slip in a cheap, catty comment about Ms. Seaborne's "heavyset" build. What's the point? Why not also describe the physical attributes of other players in your malicious story? You make a big deal out of revealing billing practices and office procedures of Ellen Seaborne and Associates that I suspect are common among attorneys — and let us not forget that the confidential office documents you have made public were stolen.

"Anne," the lawyer who lost her license lost it because of her own actions, not because of Ms. Seaborne. Let's place responsibility where it belongs. If there had not been justification, Ms. Seaborne and four other lawyers would not have been compelled to file complaints (as the law requires them to do if they know of another lawyer's unethical behavior); and the Arizona Bar would not have agreed with them that "Anne" should not be practicing law in Arizona.

Finally, we must remember that this disgusting tempest in a teapot is about 16 complaints out of more than 1,500 cases, and all 16 were either dismissed or deemed unworthy of investigation.

Readers wonder what personal reason you have for launching this vicious vendetta and who put you up to it. We wonder why you are trying to discredit Ellen Seaborne and ruin her practice.

What a sickening way to try to boost circulation. You deserve only contempt.

Eugenia M. Horstman
Flagstaff

Editor’s note: The story about Ellen Seaborne did not indicate that any attorney other than Seaborne filed a complaint against the attorney referred to as “Anne” (not her real name). Anne told one source that Seaborne was connected to most of the five complaints against her that resulted in disciplinary proceedings. It may well be that one or more attorneys other than Seaborne also filed complaints against Anne, but the available documentation is not entirely clear about the identities of Anne’s complainants. There is however evidence indicating that at least one of the other four complaints against Anne was brought by a Seaborne client.

There have been 16 complaints recorded at the Bar in the last three years. One of these complaints involves two complainants. That’s 17 people. Plus, I am aware of three other people who claim to have made complaints. However, for one reason or another, the complaints of these three people were not part of the public record at the time that I did my investigation. These “missing” complaints are discussed in more detail in the longer version of the story about Ellen Seaborne elsewhere on this Web site. In all, I am aware of 20 people who have filed complaints with the Bar against Ellen Seaborne in about the last three years. There are also two or three others who have told me that they plan to file complaints soon. I strongly suspect that there have been other complaints against Ellen Seaborne prior to the last three years.

Dan Frazier

-------------------------------------------

Legal abuse built into system

I appreciate you writing (the story about attorney Ellen Seaborne) and confronting the problems with the power differential that exists between clients and lawyers. When a client retains a lawyer in our present system there is an immediate conflict of interest. It is in the lawyer's best interest to offend no one who can help with future advancement and to drag the case out to take as much money from the case as possible.

Lawyers could not behave so badly if there was any type of watchdog that really worked. As it is clients wind up in a taking machine. Laws are good but ignored. Dialogue is essential if we are not to admit that we live in a totalitarian state where truth is punished and freedom of speech gives away to political correctness leaving human correctness sacrificed. Keep up the good work.

Karin Huffer, M.S., M.F.T.
Las Vegas

(Huffer is the author of Overcoming the Devastation of Legal Abuse Syndrome.)

-------------------------------------------

Seaborne story a Godsend !

The story about attorney Ellen Seaborne is fantastic! All so very true! I wanted so very much to take a copy of it and give it to her (Seaborne) personally this morning, but knowing her, she would probably file another Class 6 felony on me for something! Thank you so much for doing the investigation. I know it was very time consuming and a lot of work, but she really needed to be shown and proven for the true deceitful person that she is! God will bless you for all your hard work.

Thank you again for the wonderful true story. God Bless you and your wife for all the wonderful work you do on the paper.

Linda Hawkins

Flagstaff

Editor's note: Linda Hawkin's ex-husband was an Ellen Seaborne client. Hawkins has filed a complaint against Ellen Seaborne that is currently being reviewed by the Arizona State Bar.

-------------------------------------------

Unlicensed lawyers a problem

Your story regarding a Flagstaff attorney in the March issue may have inadvertently left the impression that purchasers of legal services should be concerned only that the person from whom they seek legal services behaves ethically. Lawyers certainly should do that and clients have every right to demand it. However, consumers also should make sure to seek legal advice and representation from those qualified to give it.

For many years lawyers in Arizona were regulated by statute. The state legislature mandated the creation of the State Bar of Arizona and required all persons who desired to practice law to obtain a license through that organization. Unfortunately, the statutes authorizing the State Bar and prohibiting the practice of law without a license "sunsetted" during the 1980s. Those laws have never been renewed. As a result, in this state many people sell legal services without having attended law school or passing the bar exam.

These unlicensed practitioners frequently hurt those they intend to help. Often the use of unlicensed practitioners brings severe financial hardship to their "clients," to say nothing of prejudice to their legal interests. Readers can learn more about that by checking the State Bar's Web site, www.azbar.org. The worthy cause of improving the quality of legal representation in Flagstaff and elsewhere in Arizona can be advanced by asking your state senator and/or state representative to support enactment of a statute prohibiting the practice of law without a license.