Innovation Pharmaceuticals Inc (IPIX)

[Areader]

Code of Conduct Rule 3.1:

Non-Meritorious Claims and Contentions (a) A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous. A lawyer for the defendant in a criminal proceeding or for the respondent in a proceeding that could result in incarceration may nevertheless so defend the proceeding as to require that every element of the case be established. (b) A lawyer's conduct is "frivolous" for purposes of this Rule if: (1) the lawyer knowingly advances a claim or defense that is unwarranted under existing law, except that the lawyer may advance such claim or defense if it can be supported by good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law;(2) the conduct has no reasonable purpose other than to delay or prolong the resolution of litigation, in violation of Rule 3.2, or serves merely to harass or maliciously injure another; or(3) the lawyer knowingly asserts material factual

As Barron pointed out, this is the rule they have violated. I said to also file complaints against McKenna and Egleston because it seems they are the only other law firm that has actually filed a suit and because they are also in Manhattan, so it is the exact same process and form and practically verbatim complaint.

Perhaps an attorney on the board (I am not one) can weigh in on if 3.1 covers attorneys who are fishing, not just those that have filed.