Monday, March 29, 2010

The Instant Misconduct

In a case involving an attorney who had been subject to two prior informal admonitions ana a public censure, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reduced the sanction of a two year suspension proposed by its Disciplinary Board and ordered a suspension for one year and one day. The attorney had incompetently handled a matter and, according to the Board, "simply did not participate in the litigation after he had filed the complaint." He failed to cooperate with the clients' new attorney after he was fired.

The Board was not impressed:

Notwithstanding [his] history of prior discipline, Respondent is yet again before the Board. Quite obviously, these prior entanglements have not impressed upon Respondent his responsibilities to his clients. Respondent did not appear remorseful either for his instant misconduct or any of the past incidents. The instant record is completely devoid of evidence to support a finding that respondent intends to conform his actions to the Rules of Professional conduct in the future.

Two justices would impose the recommended two-year suspension. (Mike Frisch)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2010/03/the-instant-misconduct.html

Bar Discipline & Process | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef01310ff42aec970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Instant Misconduct:

Comments

Post a comment