|
SUSPENSION
On September 24, 2002, the Honorable Stephen L. Henriod, Third Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Discipline: Suspension, suspending Douglas S. Haymore II
from the practice of law for three months for violation of Rules 1.1 (Competence), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(a) and (b) (Communication), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating Representation),
5.3(b) (Responsibilities Regarding Non Lawyer Assistants), 8.4(a) (Misconduct). The suspension is effective beginning September 24, 2002.
In summary:
In one matter, Mr. Haymore
was retained to represent a client in two small claims cases. The client could not attend the trial. Mr. Haymore agreed to continue the trial date. Mr. Haymore did not continue the trial
date. A motion to set aside the default was denied because the trial notice had been sent directly to the client and no appearance of counsel was filed.
In another matter, Mr.
Haymore was retained to represent a client in a personal injury matter when the client's former attorney became ill. Mr. Haymore hired the former attorney's paralegal to work on the case.
Medical and insurance records pertaining to the client's case were not requested or acquired. Settlement demands or negotiations did not occur and no pleadings were prepared for almost
three years. Mr. Haymore did not reasonably keep his client informed and did not enable his client to make informed decisions regarding the case or Mr. Haymore's representation. Mr.
Haymore instructed the client to communicate through his paralegal. The paralegal was not supervised to a standard where the case was diligently managed. Mr. Haymore failed to ensure his
client's file was delivered to her in a timely and reasonable manner.
INTERIM SUSPENSION
On September 18, 2002, the Honorable Frank G. Noel, Third Judicial District
Court, entered an Order of Interim Suspension, suspending Francis Angley from the practice of law pending final disposition of the disciplinary proceeding predicated upon his alleged
misconduct.
On October 1, 2002, the Honorable Frank G. Noel, entered an Order permitting Mr. Angley to represent Sandra Miller for the limited purpose of filing a Memorandum in
Opposition to Summary Judgment in her employment discrimination case pending in federal court, and the oral argument, if it is set before she can obtain new counsel.
REPRIMAND
On September 10, 2002, the Honorable Roger Livingston, Third Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Discipline: Reprimand, reprimanding Michael L. Humiston for violation of
Rules 1.2(a) (Scope of Representation), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(a) (Communication), 1.5(a) (Fees), 1.5(b) (Fees), 1.6(a) (Confidentiality of Information), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating
Representation), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct).
In summary:
Mr. Humiston was retained to represent a client in connection with late and deficient alimony and child support payments
and custody issues. The client paid Mr. Humiston $2,000. No fee agreement or basis or rate of the fee was communicated to the client. The client met with Mr. Humiston on two or three
occasions, met with his assistant twice, and spoke with him by telephone two or three times. Most of the communication was by e-mail, but only on occasion did Mr. Humiston respond. Mr.
Humiston did not provide any meaningful information to the client. The client's former husband filed a petition to modify custody. The client discussed the matter with Mr. Humiston. Mr.
Humiston told his client that he would file a response. Thereafter Mr. Humiston did not return the client's telephone calls or respond to her e-mail. The client later learned from her new
attorney that a default was entered because Mr. Humiston did not appear at the pre-trial conference or file a response to the petition. Mr. Humiston refunded $1,000 to his client, but did
not account for the $1,000 he retained.
ADMONITION
On October 2, 2002, an attorney was admonished by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee for violation of
Rules 1.5(b) or (c) (Fees), 1.4(b) (Communication), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
A client's former attorney was retained to
represent a client in a personal injury matter. The client's former attorney negotiated a settlement with the insurance company, but that attorney died before completing the settlement.
Subsequently, the client retained the attorney who is the subject of this proceeding for representation in the personal injury matter. The client wished a prompt settlement, without court
proceedings. The attorney requested that the settlement check be reissued to the attorney, then rejected the settlement without consulting the client. The client and attorney agreed that
the attorney would assist in managing unpaid medical bills. The attorney did not assist in managing the unpaid medical bills. The attorney did not return the client's telephone calls or
keep the client reasonably informed of the status of the case. The attorney did not request that the client sign a fee agreement until eleven months after the attorney was hired. The
client did not sign the fee agreement.
ADMONITION
On October 9, 2002, an attorney was admonished by the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee for violation of
Rules 1.1 (Competence), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4 (Communication), 8.4(d) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
In summary:
The attorney was
retained to represent a company against a lawsuit. The attorney failed to attend a Settlement/Pretrial Conference and a Final Pretrial Conference/Summary Judgment Hearing, which the court
had ordered counsel who would try the case to attend. The attorney did not obtain court permission for either of the absences. The attorney agreed to attempt to settle the case, but did
not diligently pursue settlement negotiations. The attorney obtained permission from the company to have an attorney who was assisting a co-defendant appear at the reset Final Pretrial
Conference to keep costs down. The attorney did not inform the company that the court had ordered all trial counsel to be present, or that the attorney had previously missed two court
appearances. The attorney asked the co-defendant's counsel to appear but failed to obtain court approval for the attorney's nonappearance at the Final Pretrial Conference. The
co-defendant's counsel did not attend the hearing because of a scheduling conflict. The attorney failed to appear at the Final Pretrial Conference. The attorney's absence resulted in the
entry of a default judgment against the company. The attorney filed a motion to set aside the default judgment, but did not inform the company until after the motion was denied. The
attorney filed an appeal and the case and judgment was eventually settled.
|
