Philadelphia, Pennsylvania—The legal community in Pennsylvania has been abuzz with the news that a Philadelphia attorney, Joseph D. Lento, has been handed a five-year suspension. This disciplinary action came after a state board determined that Lento demonstrated a chronic lack of ethical judgment and failed to show genuine concern for his clients’ interests.
Issued on November 19 by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the suspension order was the culmination of findings from a July disciplinary report which highlighted Lento’s dubious practices when representing clients. This report accused him of taking on cases without verifying if client objectives could be met, yet charging legal fees regardless.
The board delved into Lento’s professional conduct over a period of two and a half years, during which he frequently entered into unclear fee agreements for services he was either unqualified to perform or failed to execute due to incompetence. This misconduct included improperly managed client cases, incorrect legal filings, and insufficient oversight of his law office employees.
Specific instances of Lento’s failures were particularly telling. In one case, a client paid Lento $9,000 to expunge a criminal record, only to discover significant misunderstandings regarding the legal timeline and the scope of what could be expunged. In another, a former colleague at Lento’s firm filed a disability claim against a business that ultimately led to legal complexities when continuity in representation was mishandled.
Additionally, Lento faced allegations of failing to amend a professional motion which misrepresented his disciplinary history and misinforming a client about the sealing of felony convictions under specific legal statutes. This pattern of misconduct demonstrated a significant departure from expectations of diligence and integrity in the legal profession.
Paul Batista, representing Lento, has expressed intentions to vigorously challenge the judicial findings and the subsequent disciplinary measure. Batista described the suspension as “excessive and wholly disproportionate,” defending Lento as an innovator in the legal arena, particularly in representing clients dealing with educational institutions. He emphasized that Lento has served many clients prudently and efficiently without ever misappropriating client funds.
The controversy has sparked a dialogue about the balance between innovation in legal practices and adherence to traditional ethical standards. As Lento prepares to defend his professional reputation, the legal community watches closely, aware this case could influence disciplinary standards and practices in Pennsylvania and possibly beyond.
This article was compiled with the help of AI technology and may contain factual uncertainties. Readers are encouraged to direct concerns or requests for corrections and retractions to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.