He has touted himself as an expert in his field and advertised his business as the tougher, trusted and “top-rated” law firm that fights for the little guy.

But high-profile personal injury lawyer Jeremy Diamond is alleged to have no experience conducting trials in personal injury law or representing any such clients, according to the province’s legal regulator. The Law Society of Ontario also alleges that Diamond & Diamond, marketed as a multi-city, multi-office operation, “was not in fact a law firm” as defined by its rules.

In Ontario, a law firm includes one or more lawyers practising law.

After a two-year investigation, the law society’s discipline division alleged this week that Diamond marketed his services and his firm in a manner that is likely to mislead, confuse or deceive — and that rather than taking on cases himself, Diamond referred out all potential clients.

“(Diamond) has marketed, including on websites and online advertisements, legal services contrary to the Rules of Professional Conduct,” the society alleges in a notice of application issued Wednesday.

“(Diamond)’s advertisements failed to disclose clearly and prominently his practice and the practice of Diamond & Diamond, of referring potential clients to other licensees for a fee.”

Brian Greenspan, Diamond’s lawyer, told the Star he expects his client will be vindicated and that the notice of application, which triggers a hearing at the law society, represents Diamond and his firm “unfairly and incorrectly.”

During the past decade, Diamond & Diamond’s advertising was generally accepted as both appropriate and fair, Greenspan said. He said that the notice of application also mischaracterizes Diamond’s involvement with cases.

“There isn’t a file that comes into that office with Jeremy Diamond that he doesn’t review,” he said. “To suggest he isn’t involved in his cases and that he’s a referral service is not the way the firm operates today.”

A hearing date has not yet been set, according to law society spokesperson Susan Tonkin. If Diamond is found to have committed professional misconduct he could face a range of disciplinary measures, including a reprimand or suspension.

The notice is the culmination of an investigation into Jeremy Diamond and Diamond & Diamond that began in late 2016. Late last year, the law society reprimanded Diamond and ordered him to pay $25,000 in costs for failing to promptly provide records requested as part of its investigation. Greenspan said Diamond will be appealing the decision to the divisional court and that the law society is “mistaken in its view of the alleged failure to co-operate.”

“Through his lawyers, Mr. Diamond did everything in his power to be responsive to the law society’s inquiries,” Greenspan said.

A Star investigation published in 2016 revealed that Diamond & Diamond had for many years been attracting thousands of would-be clients through ubiquitous advertising campaigns and then referring them to other lawyers for sometimes hefty fees.

Former clients said they were often unaware they had been referred, or that a referral fee had been paid. Diamond & Diamond has since told the Star it has a growing roster of in-house lawyers to handle cases.

The three-page notice of application issued on Wednesday lays out allegations that include the following:

That Diamond advertised legal services through a law “firm” known as Diamond & Diamond, “Diamond & Diamond Personal Injury Lawyers” and “Diamond & Diamond Lawyers” between January 2013 and December 2017 when it was not a law firm as defined by Ontario’s rules.

That Diamond improperly marketed himself between January 2013 and December 2017 as “managing partner” and “managing lawyer” of Diamond & Diamond when in fact he operated as a sole practitioner through an entity called the “Jeremy Diamond Professional Corporation.”

That Diamond improperly marketed legal services between January 2013 and December 2017 that he “did not in fact provide.”

That Diamond, during those years, advertised himself as an expert personal injury litigation lawyer, saying he had “significant experience in all aspects of personal injury litigation” when in fact “he did not represent or provide legal services to retained clients and his experience did not include conducting trials in personal injury litigation cases.”

That Diamond improperly advertised, between January 2013 and December 2017, that he and his firm held “specialization” in the absence of a specialist certification from the law society.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

That Diamond has improperly marketed his services since January 2013 through awards that “do not genuinely reflect the legal performance or quality of legal services provided.”

That Diamond has since January 2013 improperly marketed his firm as bigger than it is, and, with descriptions, such as “top-rated” and “most trusted,” that he and his firm are qualitatively superior to other lawyers.