February 22, 2013
Reinstated Without A "Scarlet Letter Of Shame"
The Alaska Supreme Court has granted the reinstatement peition of an attorney who was disbarred in 1994.
He was disbarred primarily for an affidavit that falsely claimed that a judgment on behalf of a client was unpaid and forging a client's endorsement on a check.
Among the other violations were making sexual advances toward a client and kicking opposing counsel.
The petitioner has sought and been denied reinstatement on four prior attempts.Here, the court agreed with the favorable recommendation for reinstatement, concluded that he had matured and was rehabilitated.
The court concluded that reinstatement should be subject to a three year mentoring period, which was not "punitive or excessive."
However, the court did reject the imposition of a requirement that the petitioner "advise potential future clients of the fact and basis of [his] previous disbarment..." as proposed by the Disciplinary Board.
Such a "scarlet letter of shame" was not appropriate as the decisions leading to his disbarment and efforts to secure reinstatement are "readily available to any potential client who chooses to conduct research prior to retaining [him]." (Mike Frisch)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Reinstated Without A "Scarlet Letter Of Shame":