Sympathy Disregarded

The Oklahoma Supreme Court denied the reinstatement petition of an attorney who had been suspended for two years as a result of his participation in a fraudulent real estate transaction. The injured clients, among others, had testified in opposition to the petition. The court concluded:

We agree with the trial panel thatthere is no evidence to indicate that the attorney engaged in theunauthorized practice of law during his suspension. However, althoughthere is testimony in support of Pacenza, the transcript of proceedingsbefore the trial panel makes it clear that the attorney has notdemonstrated true remorse for the damage he caused and that hecontinues to fail to recognize that his clients have not been madewhole financially. In addition, we are presented with testimony fromthe clients harmed by the attorney’s actions leading to discipline, bythe practicing bar, and by one judicial officer questioning his legalabilities and his integrity. Finally, we are faced with evidencethat Pacenza did not strictly comply with the rules governing eitherhis suspension or his reinstatement.

In making a reinstatement decision, this Court must disregard feelings of sympathy, recognizing that the petitioner’s burden of proof is a heavy one. While we are concerned with any adverse effect reinstatement might haveon the practicing bar, our foremost consideration is always to protectthe public welfare. After having given due consideration to the evidence contained in thisrecord and the appropriate factors examined in reinstatementproceedings, we determine that the petitioner has failed to carry hisburden to show by clear and convincing evidence that he is entitled to reinstatement. Therefore, reinstatement is denied and costs of $$2,714.63 are imposed.

(Mike Frisch)