-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
WDW Spirited Quickees
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
Lee
Adventurer
That.
They made Jim Hill stop his tours. Why not stop Mongello?
While they are at it, they need to go ahead and finally put a stop to all the live podcasting and interviewing on property. Real media couldn't get away with it.
asianway
Well-Known Member
That.
They made Jim Hill stop his tours. Why not stop Mongello?
While they are at it, they need to go ahead and finally put a stop to all the live podcasting and interviewing on property. Real media couldn't get away with it.[/quote]
Lee, you're going to hate me for saying this...but have you ever considered if the Adventurers Club hadn't closed it may have been the blogosphere clubhouse?
Lee
Adventurer
Eh....that would be a pain, truly. But our Club was open to all, even the extremely annoying.
(I learned that when I got cornered and babbled at by the tattoo guy one night in the Salon.)
asianway
Well-Known Member
Half dozen trespass warnings will work wonders
Lee
Adventurer
The ones they need to stop would be the ones with very official Disney-looking shirts, toting laptops and microphones through the park, interviewing guests and cast.
If legit media isn't allowed to do that...
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Lee
Adventurer
Yes, exactly.
He should have been ejected from the park as soon as a CM saw him.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
I can totally see the video of Lou and Co. bawling their eyes out because they can never go into a Disney park.
VoiceInTheCrowd
Member
I've heard of Mongello pulling this at wdw and to a lesser extent Disneyland, has he done it at any of the international parks as well or is that where they draw the line? Seeing as how his style seems to be overbearingly forcing himself on people I just imagine the Japanese being really creeped out and frightened by him.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Could he afford to visit Tokyo or Paris on a regular enough basis?
I always thought Mongello was a former attorney -- in other words, that he no longer practices law.
However, according to the website of Mongello & Scialabba (which is linked to the WDWRadio site), he is still described as "of counsel" to the law firm, whatever this designation means. Furthermore, his bio on the law firm's site also notes that "he is currently the Chief Technical Officer and Vice President of Operations" for Tricat, which ostensibly provides "medical imaging information services."
All of this raises a number of questions.
Is it ethical for a practicing attorney to contemporaneously own and/or operate multiple, other non-legal businesses?
Conversely, is it ethical for a non-practicing attorney to continue to draw an income from a law firm, even if that firm is owned in part by the attorney and/or other members of his family? (I don't know whether Lou in fact derives any income from Mongello & Scialabba, but it would be odd to publicly hold oneself out as professionally affiliated, in a presumably non-volunteer position, with an entity for which one does no paid work whatsoever.) Keep in mind that what is "ethical" from a layperson's point of view (e.g., having a family member paying you for work you didn't really do by characterizing such payment as a gift) may not be ethical from the standpoint of a professional organization that regulates the practice of law.
And how much law can someone really practice if he not only lives hundreds of miles away from his law firm, but also spends seemingly all of his conceivable free time wandering around theme parks and working on material for his podcast, blog, and website? If I were a potential client, would I really want to engage the services of a law firm, one of whose attorneys seems to have little actual commitment to or interest in the practice of law?
I'm no expert on legal ethics, but most of the above questions arise naturally as a matter of common sense, as well as the general understanding that certain professionals, such as doctors and lawyers, operate within strict sets of ethics guidelines that regulate how they must practice their professions.
(As an aside, the website for Tricat has no content of any substance, nor any indication of what exactly the company does, who runs it, or where it is located. No address or phone number is provided, and the only way to contact anybody is to fill out an online inquiry form. You'd think that a company that purportedly provides medical services -- much like one that provides legal services -- would fully document their relevant accreditation, etc. As it stands, the website for Tricat almost makes it seem like an entity that was solely created as a shell for other purposes.)
However, according to the website of Mongello & Scialabba (which is linked to the WDWRadio site), he is still described as "of counsel" to the law firm, whatever this designation means. Furthermore, his bio on the law firm's site also notes that "he is currently the Chief Technical Officer and Vice President of Operations" for Tricat, which ostensibly provides "medical imaging information services."
All of this raises a number of questions.
Is it ethical for a practicing attorney to contemporaneously own and/or operate multiple, other non-legal businesses?
Conversely, is it ethical for a non-practicing attorney to continue to draw an income from a law firm, even if that firm is owned in part by the attorney and/or other members of his family? (I don't know whether Lou in fact derives any income from Mongello & Scialabba, but it would be odd to publicly hold oneself out as professionally affiliated, in a presumably non-volunteer position, with an entity for which one does no paid work whatsoever.) Keep in mind that what is "ethical" from a layperson's point of view (e.g., having a family member paying you for work you didn't really do by characterizing such payment as a gift) may not be ethical from the standpoint of a professional organization that regulates the practice of law.
And how much law can someone really practice if he not only lives hundreds of miles away from his law firm, but also spends seemingly all of his conceivable free time wandering around theme parks and working on material for his podcast, blog, and website? If I were a potential client, would I really want to engage the services of a law firm, one of whose attorneys seems to have little actual commitment to or interest in the practice of law?
I'm no expert on legal ethics, but most of the above questions arise naturally as a matter of common sense, as well as the general understanding that certain professionals, such as doctors and lawyers, operate within strict sets of ethics guidelines that regulate how they must practice their professions.
(As an aside, the website for Tricat has no content of any substance, nor any indication of what exactly the company does, who runs it, or where it is located. No address or phone number is provided, and the only way to contact anybody is to fill out an online inquiry form. You'd think that a company that purportedly provides medical services -- much like one that provides legal services -- would fully document their relevant accreditation, etc. As it stands, the website for Tricat almost makes it seem like an entity that was solely created as a shell for other purposes.)
ChrisM
Well-Known Member
The "of counsel" designation at a law firm of any size typically means an attorney who is not a partner or on a partner track, typically with enough years of service to no longer be designated an associate (although associates are usually on a partner track, hence their designation as associates). These folks are usually kept around for their deep expertise in a given practice area, their political connections, or because they are rainmakers. Occasionally it's simple nepotism/cronyism.
Since his name is on that firm, I'm guessing it's something more along the lines of nepotism or he's simply a former founder who no longer has an equity stake in the firm.