Ever had a problem with an attorney? More often than not, complaints against Nevada lawyers fall on deaf ears. News 3 Investigator Glen Meek has been digging deeper into attorney discipline, and discovers some surprising statistics.

According to a 2002 survey, if you complained to the state bar about a local lawyer, the odds are four to one the complaint was never even investigated. And if you believe that doctors take care of each other when it comes to professional discipline, wait until you see the case some people are making against lawyers.

On a December night in 1996, a limo full of passengers collided with a small car on Interstate 15 near Flamingo Road. People injured in the limo filed a lawsuit, but not all of them were happy with their lawyer. "He never informed us of the settlement, number one, or that there was the possibility payment was going to be made."

Teri Bedford says she never saw a dime of the 100 thousand dollar settlement, though the lawyer's sister, who was also in the limo, did. "He took that sum of money and gave it to his relative and left the rest of us out in the cold." So Bedford filed a complaint with the Nevada Bar Association against the lawyer. Bedford was astonished to learn a gag order, known as rule #121, prevented her from talking publicly about her complaint unless the lawyer was formally charged.

Bedford sued the bar, and won the right to speak out about her case, though her lawyer was never sanctioned. "When they allow unethical lawyers to continue to operate, that's not a public service."

"I don't think a gag order is a bad thing. I think it's simply protecting the confidentiality of both sides." John Curtas is on the board of governors for the bar association. He says without the gag rule, lawyers would find their reputations trampled by anyone with a grudge, legitimate or not. But consumer advocates wonder why lawyers are treated differently than other business people.

Whether it's the Better Business Bureau, whether it's the contractors board, whether it's the state consumer affairs division, you can go and check a person's record as to number of complaints. "I could see why, as a consumer reporter, I could see why you'd want to do it, but as a person protecting both sides, both the public and the profession, I think there needs to be a balancing test employed, and I think it needs to be more delicate than just complete disclosure at all times."

Nevada's ratio of complaints per hundred lawyers is second highest in the nation. Curtas doesn't dispute the numbers, but offers an explanation. "They don't call it sin city for nothing and lawyers are as susceptible to sin as anyone. And, unfortunately, we have a public trust and all this sin can sometimes tempt people to violate that trust."

But are lawyers who violate the public trust being held accountable? According to an American Bar Association survey, of the 1,240 complaints made against Nevada lawyers in 2002, less than two dozen resulted in formal charges. And secrecy laws prevent the public from looking at the thousands of complaints that didn't result in sanctions.

Suzanne Mishkin is with a legal reform organization called HALT. "Nevada residents have a right to this information, and it's questionable about why Nevada's bar is insistent about keeping the records under seal. What do they have to hide?"

It's just a matter of being able to look at who's getting all those complaints. Might that not be enlightening to the public? Curtas says, "It might be enlightening, but it could also damage, irreparably damage, somebody's reputation who's done nothing wrong."

Of course, if you don't get satisfaction from the state bar you can always sue your lawyer for malpractice. First you have to find a lawyer willing to sue a colleague. And there are other obstacles. "A legal malpractice case is a case within a case." Gary Logan is one lawyer willing to sue another. But he says people who take their attorneys to court face a double challenge. "In order to win, you have to not only prove your lawyer botched your case, but you also have to prove you would have won otherwise. So you've got two cases: The underlying case and the case against the lawyer.

John Curtas says, It's a double hurdle you must jump, but that's just the nature of our legal system where you're trying to sue somebody for causing you harm, and a lawyer commits malpractice by not doing it. First you have to prove that someone else is responsible for that harm.

Legal reform advocates would like to see less secrecy in the attorney discipline process and more public input. For example, when we asked the state bar to give us the names of people who sit on the panels that discipline lawyers, we were told that information was confidential. The bar would only tell us three people sit on each panel, two lawyers and one lay person.

By the way, the lawyer that Teri Bedford complained about was originally given a private reprimand, but he appealed the decision. The panel that heard the appeal decided the lawyer did nothing wrong.