Bankruptcy Conflict Leads To Suspension

From a discipline case decided by the Oregon Supreme Court:

In this lawyer disciplinary matter, theBar charged the accused with ethical violations in two separate matters.  Inthe first matter, the Bar charged that the accused violated conflict ofinterest rules in a bankruptcy case.  The trial panel concluded (1) that theaccused did not violate DR 5-101(A)(1) when, although he had represented the debtor in a Chapter 13 bankruptcyproceeding, and was therefore an administrative creditor of the estate, heagreed to serve as special counsel to the estate when the bankruptcy wasconverted to a Chapter 7 proceeding; but (2) that the accused did violate DR5-105(C) when, after the trustee in the Chapter 7 case reached a settlement thatwas contrary to the accused’s interest in collecting his fees, he resigned as specialcounsel and represented new clients in an appeal that challenged the settlement. In the second matter, the trial panel concluded that the accused violated DR2-106(A) when he charged his client, Burch, for late fees in excess of thelegal rate of interest, although no written agreement required payment of suchfees, and when he charged Burch hourly fees for a trespass case, although a writtenagreement provided for a contingency fee.  In part because the accused had beendisciplined previously, the trial panel recommended that he be suspended fromthe practice of law for 90 days.

The court affirmed the legal conclusions of the trial panel and imposed a 60-day suspension. (Mike Frisch)