How Lyle Howe made race the centre of his disciplinary hearing
Polarizing Halifax lawyer says the case against him isn't about missing court dates — it's about race
It is the longest, costliest and arguably most polarizing disciplinary hearing in Nova Scotia legal history. And with closing arguments scheduled for the next two days, this week begins what is supposed to be the final chapter.
On one side: the Nova Scotia Barristers' Society, the body that regulates the legal profession in the province.
On the other: Halifax defence lawyer Lyle Howe.
The society accuses Howe of professional misconduct and professional incompetence. If found guilty, he could be disbarred.
When the disciplinary hearing started in December 2015, it seemed straightforward. The bulk of the allegations against Howe focussed on rather mundane aspects of his practice — things like double booking and missing court dates.
But along the way, Howe has taken the hearing down a different path, exploring issues of race.
Black and white
Howe is African-Nova Scotian. He argues lots of other lawyers commit the same infractions he is accused of, but none of them face discipline. The only difference between them and him, he says, is that he is black.
Howe has attempted to build this argument throughout the hearing by asking the same set of questions to each lawyer who testified. Most have admitted that, yes, there had been a time or two when they might have been double booked or late for a court appearance.
But they would also say those double bookings were in courtrooms in the same courthouse.
Howe's alleged transgressions, however, are more egregious. In an episode cited repeatedly during the hearing, he was scheduled to appear in family court in north-end Halifax, as well as provincial courts in Bridgewater, Dartmouth and Halifax all on the same day. Howe says other lawyers in his firm were scheduled to make those appearances.
The society bolstered its arguments with court dockets and Howe's own court appointment calendar, which had been seized in preparation for the hearing.
Howe admitted in his own testimony and in cross-examination of other witnesses that he hadn't always been diligent about keeping courts and other lawyers informed of his whereabouts, or making scheduled appearances. But he also stressed that his practice methods had improved immensely under the strict conditions and supervision imposed by the society.
Suspended without explanation
That supervision came to a screeching halt just before the Labour Day weekend last year when Howe's law practice was suspended. He has said he only learned of it when reporters called him looking for comment, has never received a clear explanation for the suspension or faced any new disciplinary charges.
In the weeks after his suspension, Howe told the three-member panel hearing his disciplinary case that he was frustrated and angry. He said he had no intention of appealing the suspension because he has no current desire to practice law in Nova Scotia. If his licence were restored, he would uproot his family and leave Nova Scotia.
This is not the first time Howe has been prevented from practising law. He also faced suspensions when he was charged with sexual assault following an incident in a woman's apartment in March 2011. He was convicted in a jury trial in June 2014, but that conviction was overturned on appeal. The case ended when the complainant refused to go through a second trial.
Howe said as a result of his personal legal problems, he could only access the Dartmouth Crown's office under escort. Lawyers who testified at his disciplinary hearing disputed that, saying while concerns were raised, there was no hard-and-fast policy restricting his access.
Testimony revealed a fractious relationship between Howe and the provincial courts in Dartmouth. A number of judges who preside in Dartmouth recused themselves from hearing cases where Howe was counsel because Howe had accused them of being biased against him.
He also got in a loud argument with a Dartmouth Crown who accused him of trying to intimidate a witness. And rules governing lawyers' access to the holding cells at the Dartmouth courthouse were changed amid complaints Howe had been trying to solicit new clients while visiting inmates in cells.
Were warnings to help — or out of jealousy?
Howe's pursuit of new clients is one issue that may help illustrate the divide between him and other lawyers. Early in his practice, Howe aggressively pursued new clients. A number of senior defence lawyers testified at his hearing that they warned Howe he was expanding too quickly.
The warnings came either in informal hallway conversations at courthouses or, more formally, when some of those lawyers were hired by the society to review Howe's practice.
The lawyers said they warned Howe because they felt that as a young, relatively inexperienced lawyer, he was taking on more clients than he could reasonably handle.
Howe's take on this advice? These defence lawyers were afraid of him and viewed him as competition for clients.
Closing arguments
The three-member disciplinary panel has sat for 58 days since it began 15 months ago. The hearing was originally expected to take about a week.
The panel chair, Ron MacDonald, also heads Nova Scotia's Serious Incident Response Team, the body that looks into complaints against police. He has had to schedule breaks in the hearing process to allow him time to do his main job. Decisions from SIRT have been announced in fits and starts over the last 15 months.
Similarly, panel member Don Murray, a prominent Halifax-area defence lawyer, has had to reschedule cases in order to continue attending the hearing. The third panel member is not a lawyer. He is urologist Dr. Richard Norman.
Howe has made repeated attempts to remove Murray and MacDonald from the panel. He argued both men would have a bias against him because of their backgrounds in criminal law. His arguments were rejected.
Howe also argues his charter rights have been violated by this hearing process. He plans to make that part of his closing arguments, which begin Tuesday and continue Wednesday. The final two scheduled days for this hearing are next week, after which the panel has about two months to prepare a report.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
