No Support Order
A contested hearing led to a public reprimand with terms of an “experienced family law” attorney by the Virginia State Bar Disciplinary Board.
The case was tangentially related to a high-profile case involving another Virginia lawyer
On August 23, 2013, Myrna Pride, a minor at the time, was discovered in the home of Mr. Joseph D. Morrissey. Morrissey entered an Alford plea to a misdemeanor charge of contributing to the delinquency of a minor (Ms. Pride) on December 12, 2014.
Approximately two weeks after the incident at Mr. Morrissey’s house, the Respondent undertook to represent Myrna Pride, in a matter related to a “press conference regarding Joseph Morrissey and matters in Henrico County stemming from this relationship.”
Sometime after the Respondent’s representation of Ms. Pride began, Respondent also agreed to represent Ms. Pride and her mother, Deidre Warren, on a financial matter against Ms. Pride’s father, Mr. Coleman Pride. Ms. Warren testified that she retained the Respondent to pursue the matter of “child support arrears.”
Respondent sent letters to Mr. Pride claiming that he had failed to pay child support to Ms. Warren in violation of a 2006 child support order entered in `Chesterfield County Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court.
No order of child support was entered against Mr. Pride in the Chesterfield County Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.
Respondent testified that she believed that there was a child support order based on approximately 40 pages of documents Ms. Warren gave her and based on what Ms. Warren told her.
On or about May 7, 2014, Respondent provided Mr. Morrissey’s attorneys with some of the documents she had received from Ms. Warren (the “writing”) including the pages that were subsequently submitted to the court at Mr. Morrissey’s Alford plea hearing.
Respondent testified that she prepared a Show Cause alleging that Mr. Pride had violated a Court Order when he failed to make the payments but that she did not file the pleading after she learned from the clerk of court that no such order existed.
Respondent admitted that she erroneously characterized the writing embodying the parties’ alleged agreement as a “Child Support Order” when she prepared correspondence to Mr. Pride demanding payment.
Respondent testified that, after learning that no child support order existed, she filed, on June 3, 2014, a civil matter against Mr. Pride for breach of contract. This case was later nonsuited.
In December 2014, at Mr. Morrissey’s Alford plea hearing, his attorneys offered a purported child support order into evidence consisting of two unrelated pages drawn from the documents Respondent had previously furnished to Morrissey’s team.
The Board finds that a family law attorney having the legal knowledge, skill and preparation necessary for the representation in this case should have recognized that the writing was not a Child Support Order and would not have made representations to the contrary to an opposing party or an attorney.
The Richmond Times-Dispatch reported on a state bar investigation of the Morrissey – Pride relationship. (Mike Frisch)