|
ADMONITION
On March 27, 2003, an attorney was admonished by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.3 (Diligence),
1.4(a) (Communication), 1.6 (Confidentiality of Information), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating Representation), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
An attorney was retained to represent a client in a personal injury matter. The attorney intended to offer a settlement demand but failed to follow through. The client did
not receive any written communication about the status of the case. The attorney asked another attorney to take over the case. The other attorney shared office space with the attorney,
but was not associated with the attorney's law firm. The attorney telephoned the client concerning withdrawal of representation from the case, but did not send written communication to
the client. The attorney did not consult with the client before referring the case to another attorney.
Mitigating factors include: absence of prior record of discipline, absence
of dishonest or selfish motive, and personal or emotional problems.
ADMONITION
On April 9, 2003, an attorney was admonished by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline
Committee of the Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.3 (Diligence) and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
An attorney was retained to
represent clients regarding a debt collection matter. The clients provided the attorney with a Summons and Complaint that had been served upon the clients. The attorney failed to answer
the Complaint. The court entered a default judgment against the clients. The clients became aware of the default judgment when the plaintiff tried to collect on a garnishment. The
attorney assisted the clients with their request to have the default judgment set aside and continued to represent the clients in the matter.
PUBLIC REPRIMAND
On April 9,
2003, Brenda L. Flanders was publicly reprimanded by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.15 (Safekeeping Property) and
8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
Ms. Flanders was retained to represent a company in a debt collection matter. Ms. Flanders was paid a
retainer by check and deposited it into her trust account. Ms. Flanders erred on her billing statement to the company in the debt collection matter by stating that she had earned the
retainer fee and withdrew the remainder of the retainer from her trust account for legal work she did for another client. Thus, she paid herself for legal work from the wrong client. Ms.
Flanders took several months to correct the error.
ADMONITION
On April 14, 2003, an attorney was admonished by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the
Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.4 (Communication), 1.5(b) (Fees), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
An attorney was retained
to represent a client in a divorce action. The client paid a retainer to the attorney. The attorney did not provide a bill or written explanation of the attorney's hourly rate. The
attorney failed to keep the client reasonably informed of the status of the case; the attorney failed to inform the client that a pretrial conference had been scheduled. The attorney
failed to comply with the Office of Professional Conduct's requests for information.
ADMONITION
On April 14, 2003, an attorney was admonished by the Chair of the Ethics
and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.3 (Diligence), 1.5(a) (Fees), 3.2 (Expediting Litigation), and 8.4(a) and (d) (Misconduct) of the Rules of
Professional Conduct.
In summary:
An attorney represented a client in an immigration matter. The attorney was late for a hearing and failed to timely file documents with the
immigration court. The attorney accepted a fee and thereafter failed to timely and effectively perform the necessary legal services. The attorney requested continuances, thereby failing
to expedite the case. The attorney eventually refunded to the client all fees received.
Mitigating factors include: absence of prior record of discipline; absence of dishonest or
selfish motive; timely good faith effort to make restitution or to rectify the consequences of the misconduct involved; cooperative attitude toward the Office of Professional Conduct's
proceedings; and remorse.
SUSPENSION
On April 16, 2003, the Honorable William W. Barrett, Third Judicial District Court, entered Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and
Order of Suspension, suspending Robert L. Booker for a period of eighteen months. Mr. Booker's suspension is effective May 21, 2003.
In summary:
Mr. Booker represented a client
in a criminal matter before the Federal District Court. Mr. Booker failed to appear for trial. Mr. Booker failed to accede to the Court's verbal order to be at a pre-trial conference. At
another pre-trial conference, Mr. Booker made repeated arguments to the Court for continuance of the trial, and repeatedly spoke after the judge told him to be quiet. The Court issued a
finding of contempt because of Mr. Booker's conduct and placed him in jail. Mr. Booker was subsequently disqualified and removed because of his conduct. In another case, Mr. Booker was
retained to represent a client in a criminal matter. Mr. Booker communicated with his client's co-accused without the consent of the co-accused's attorney. This communication with Mr.
Booker caused the co-accused to stop cooperating with his counsel. Mr. Booker was unprepared to go forward at his client's sentencing hearing.
RESIGNATION PENDING DISCIPLINE
On April 17, 2003, the Honorable Chief Justice Christine Durham, Utah Supreme Court, entered an Order Accepting Resignation Pending Discipline concerning Randall D. Lund.
In summary:
From January 1999 through May 1999 Mr. Lund obtained prescriptions from several doctors without disclosing to the doctors that he had received prescriptions from others.
Mr. Lund was charged with nine counts of Obtaining a Controlled Substance by Fraud. Mr. Lund entered a guilty plea in abeyance to three counts of Falsely Obtaining/Dispensing
Prescriptions and was convicted of Falsely Obtaining/Dispensing Prescriptions, a Third Degree Felony. Mr. Lund was placed on supervised probation and failed to stay in contact with his
probation case manager. Additionally, Mr. Lund failed to comply with the Office of Professional Conduct's requests for information in this matter.
RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE
On April 22, 2003, the Honorable Robin W. Reese, Third Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Reciprocal Discipline, suspending H. Delbert Welker from the practice of law for a
period of eighteen months. Mr. Welker's suspension is effective as of March 28, 2003.
In summary:
On May 31, 2002, the Supreme Court of California entered an order suspending
Mr. Welker from the practice of law for a period of three years, placed on probation for four years, on the condition that he be actually suspended for 18 months. In a personal
injury/workers' compensation matter, Mr. Welker failed to conduct formal discovery or arrange for a qualified medical exam, and allowed mediation to proceed before medical information was
available. Mr. Welker misrepresented the client's authorization to settle a claim in a sworn declaration filed with the court. In another matter, Mr. Welker failed to pay medical service
provider liens as directed by his client, the funds for which having been deposited in his client trust account for this purpose. In a third matter, Mr. Welker issued checks out of his
clients trust account for personal and family expenses. In a fourth matter, Mr. Welker failed to inform the State Bar of California of a January 29, 2001 order entered by the Third
Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah, suspending Mr. Welker from the practice of law in Utah.
ADMONITION
On April 28, 2003, an attorney was admonished by the
Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.4(a) (Communication) and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
An attorney was retained to finalize a Qualified Domestic Relations Order and to collect money pursuant to the client's Decree of Divorce. The attorney failed to keep the
client informed of the status of the case, either by returning telephone calls or written correspondence. The attorney's billing records reflected that no work was done during many months
in which the client waited, without word of the progress in the case. The client requested assistance from the Utah State Bar and the attorney withdrew from the client's case.
ADMONITION
On May 8, 2003, an attorney was admonished by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.15 (Safekeeping
Property) and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
The Office of Professional Conduct received an overdraft notice from a bank concerning an
attorney's trust account. The overdraft was caused by accounting errors the attorney made in the management of the trust account. The attorney mistakenly made an overpayment to a client.
The attorney returned sufficient funds to cover only part of the full amount paid to the client. The deficit was not discovered until the overdraft occurred, at which time the attorney
returned sufficient funds to cover the deficit. Attorneys fees were also withdrawn from the trust account for services performed by the attorney for clients who had agreed to pay
retainers, but failed to do so. The attorney mistakenly added the anticipated retainers to the accounting on the trust account ledgers. The attorney negligently forgot to withdraw earned
attorney fees from the trust account in several cases. The funds that were mistakenly withdrawn against the anticipated retainers were offset by the attorney fees mistakenly left in the
trust account. The attorney corrected the accounting errors once the errors were discovered.
Mitigating factors include: absence of a prior record of discipline; cooperation with the Office of Professional Conduct.
PUBLIC REPRIMAND
On May 8, 2003, Thomas R.
Blonquist was publicly reprimanded by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court for violation of Rules 1.4(b) (Communication), 1.8(a) and (b) (Conflict of
Interest: Prohibited Transactions), 1.15(a) and (b) (Safekeeping Property), 8.1(b) (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
Mr. Blonquist was retained to represent a client in a divorce matter. The client received a cash settlement at the conclusion of the divorce. At, or shortly after
settlement, Mr. Blonquist solicited the client's investment in a company in which he acted as counsel and had a financial interest. Mr. Blonquist personally guaranteed the investment. The
client had limited knowledge concerning the transaction. Mr. Blonquist failed to explain the risks of his client's decision to invest, and to make the client fully aware of other options.
Mr. Blonquist comingled his client's money with his own or that of his business funds. Mr. Blonquist failed to comply with the Office of Professional Conduct's requests for information.
|
