Attorney Christopher A. Pearsall

On or about December 4, 2008, I received a letter from the General Counsel of the Rhode Island Supreme Court the letter reads as follows:

December 2, 2008

Via First Class Mail
Mr. Christopher Pearall
Attorney at Law
70 Dogwood Drive
Suite 304
West Warwick, RI  02893

Dear Attorney Pearsall:

        It has come to the attention of this Office that a potential violation of Rule 8.2(a) of the Supreme Court Rules of Professional Conduct may have occurred due to your posting of various disparaging, misleading, and false statements regarding a member of the Rhode Island Judiciary on your website:  http://www.attorneypearsall.com/2008/09/judgelaureendam.html as well as on http://www.links4women.com/articles/chris.htm .  Specifically, these entries appear to describe an incident that occurred in 2007 relating to your conduct as counsel before Associate Justice Laureen D'Ambra and they contain unfounded allegations of incompetence and impropriety against Justice D'Ambra as well as another judicial employee.

Rule 8.2(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct provides that

A lawyer shall not make a statement that a lawyer knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office.

December 28, 2008

Erika Leigh Kruse, Esquire
General Counsel
Rhode Island Supreme Court
Frank Licht Judicial Complex
Providence, RI  02903

Dear Attorney Kruse:

         Regarding your December 2nd letter, I do not own or control the content at Links4Women.com, therefore I can do nothing about the content that appears there.

        I have had no intention of violating Rule 8.2(a) of the Professional Rules of Ethical Conduct, however I do believe I have the right to express myself within the bounds of the Professional Rules of Ethical Conduct. 

I will re-read the article at AttorneyPearsall.com and any other articles over which I may still have editorial control in light of my 1 ½ year investigation.

        However, it would be very helpful if you (or the unknown complainant) would identify the statements believed to be in violation of Rule 8.2(a).  This will allow me to address any issues quickly and with clarity.

    Thank you for your consideration in this matter.

Respectfully,




Christopher A. Pearsall
CAP/cp


Notwithstanding my response to General Counsel for the Rhode Island Supreme Court, I have become painfully aware of how things work in Rhode Island.

Therefore, after substantial consideration I have removed this article and any similar articles on my websites in favor of preserving my livelihood. 

My thanks go out to the unwavering support of my friends and family through this continuing ordeal.