Op-Ed: Misconduct, Lies, and Litigation: The Troubled Attorneys Targeting Scientology

In late June 2025, the Pennsylvania Disciplinary Board issued a ruling suspending Philadelphia attorney Brian Dooley Kent. The suspension followed a formal Bar investigation into Kent’s inappropriate relationship with a client he was representing in litigation against the Church of Scientology.  Following the ruling, new concerns have emerged about other legal professionals connected to ongoing litigation against the Church of Scientology.

Recent occurrences show a broader pattern of misconduct among attorneys tied to these high-profile cases that cannot be ignored no matter what side one is on.

These developments raise legitimate concerns about the legal representation involved in these cases and whether some of these attorneys were the only ones they could get to take on such dubious cases.

 One recent example is Graham Berry, a Los Angeles-based attorney, who previously served as co-counsel with Brian Kent in cases involving Scientology.

Berry was recently added—once again—to the Judicial Council of California’s list of vexatious litigants, according to court records. The designation restricts an individual’s ability to file lawsuits without prior judicial approval. Berry has also faced past scrutiny over allegations of inappropriate conduct with clients and had previously been placed on the same list years ago, following similar concerns about his courtroom conduct. The renewed listing underscores a continued pattern of legal controversy and blatant dishonesty

Questions have also been raised about Neil Glazer, the attorney reportedly responsible for filing the initial bar complaint against Brian Kent that led to Kent’s suspension from the Bar. Glazer was himself reprimanded following an incident involving intoxication and inappropriate behavior toward a client. It appears that Glazer is no longer associated with his former law firm and is not currently active in litigation against Scientology and has taken what he describes as an “extended leave” from practicing law. In late 2024, Glazer’s Pennsylvania Bar license was administratively suspended after he failed to pay annual dues and did not complete his continuing legal education requirements. On his personal website, Glazer states that he has since shifted his focus to public policy, particularly in the area of sustainable economic development.

Another attorney whose name comes up is Michael Dolce, formerly of a law firm that collaborated with legal scholar and nonprofit president Marci Hamilton (who also had worked closely with Brian Kent in several matters involving Scientology.)  In December 2023, Dolce was sentenced to four years in federal prison and 15 years of supervised release after pleading guilty to possessing child pornography. According to a statement from the U.S. Department of Justice, Dolce admitted to downloading illicit material to his personal laptop at his West Palm Beach apartment. Court filings revealed that he used peer-to-peer software to search for and download explicit content involving prepubescent children. Nearly 2,000 images and videos were recovered from his device.

Regardless of which side you align with in the cases these attorneys chose to represent, one thing remains clear: their own patterns of unethical behavior, both personally and professionally, cast a long shadow over their motives. When those tasked with upholding the law are themselves entangled in misconduct, it raises serious questions—not just about their credibility, but about whether justice was ever their true pursuit.