First Public Discipline In 50 Years Of Practice Is Suspension

The North Carolina State Bar Disciplinary Hearing Commission  ordered a two-year suspension with the possibility of reinstatement after six months of an attorney who has practiced since 1963, 

The attorney represented the client in a contingent fee matter. He accepted a settlement after the client had fired him and failed to cooperate with the client’s newly retained lawyer, 

The settlement was enforced when a judge found that the attorney had apparent authority to enter into it.

The commission found that the client had not unambiguously discharged at the time of the settlement but subsequently did so. The attorney violated the ethical obligations owed to a client upon termination of representation.

Defendant’s conduct caused significant harm to his client by impeding his client’s ability to direct the course of his case, by impeding his client’s ability to freely and promptly obtain new representation when desired, and by delaying his client’s ability to promptly resolve the case in an effort to preserve his fee. Defendant elevated his interests above those of his client to the detriment of his client.

On sanction

Under other circumstances, the misconduct in this case would warrant more serious discipline. However, the hearing panel finds and concludes that the unique circumstances surrounding this case justify lesser discipline than would otherwise be appropriate. The factors that particularly warrant lesser discipline include: Defendant has received no public discipline over the course of his 50-year career as an attorney, thereby suggesting Defendant’s conduct is truly an aberration of his typical character; Defendant significantly compensated his client for his wrongdoing; Defendant cooperated with the State Bar throughout this proceeding; Defendant has accepted personal responsibility for his actions; Defendant acknowledges the wrongfulness and seriousness of his misconduct; and Defendant is genuinely remorseful.

(Mike Frisch)