No Second Bite
The District of Columbia Court of Appeals imposed reciprocal disbarment of an attorney sanctioned in California.
To the extent respondent attempts to challenge the imposition of reciprocal discipline by requesting this court to conduct a hearing to permit her to relitigate the discipline imposed by the State of California, such a challenge is improper in reciprocal disciplinary proceedings, see In re Zdravkovich, 831 A.2d 964, 969 (D.C. 2003) (“Put simply, reciprocal discipline proceedings are not a forum to reargue the foreign discipline.”). Further, respondent’s response to this court’s order merely recites the exceptions to be considered in rejecting the imposition of reciprocal discipline but she fails to provide any support that any of the exceptions apply; therefore, respondent has failed to rebut the presumption that reciprocal discipline will be imposed.
The web page of the California State Bar tells the tale
Patricia Joan Barry [#59116], 74, of Los Angeles, was disbarred June 28, 2017, and ordered to comply with rule 9.20 of the California Rules of Court following her third disciplinary proceeding.
Barry was privately reproved in 2005 for multiple contempt and sanctions orders and suspended in 2011 for pursuing frivolous litigation and failing to comply with the terms of her earlier private reproval.
Although a State Bar Court hearing judge recommended a six-month suspension in the most recent case involving four counts of misconduct in two matters, the court’s Review Department concluded that Barry’s misconduct over several years resulting in three discipline proceedings demonstrates that she is unable or unwilling to follow ethical rules and that no sanction short of disbarment will prevent future violations.
In 2005, Barry stipulated to failing to maintain respect due to the court and failing to obey court orders and received a private reproval with conditions. Among other acts of misconduct, Barry used a slur to refer to a superior court judge and a deputy district attorney on the record and added that the judge had “sold [her] soul to the devil.”
In 2011, after acknowledging that she accepted employment that she knew or should have known presented a claim or defense not warranted under existing law, she was suspended for 60 days with conditions. That disciplinary event included Barry’s stipulation to having failed to comply with conditions imposed in 2005, including not passing the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination by the deadline. Following the 2011 suspension, she again failed to comply with her disciplinary conditions, raising a defense of necessity and arguing that she put the safety of her domestic violence clients ahead of meeting State Bar probation deadlines. The Review Department rejected that argument, in part because Barry failed to prove that the purported “necessity” of representing her clients precluded her compliance with her probation conditions.
In the third matter that resulted in her disbarment, Barry in 2012 filed a legal malpractice and fraud lawsuit on behalf of a client against the client’s former divorce lawyer. The case ended in a judgment of dismissal two years later following multiple sanctions against Barry for discovery violations and for failure to pay previous sanctions. She failed to report the sanctions to the State Bar. Without offering supporting evidence, Barry contended, among other things, that “she cannot afford to pay sanctions to a corrupt attorney.”
The Review Department concluded that significant aggravation of Barry’s conduct outweighs limited mitigation. The aggravation included her prior record of discipline, multiple acts of wrongdoing, lack of insight and attempts to shift blame to others. Two witnesses attested to Barry’s good character and competence and characterized her as a champion of abused women. The court assigned nominal weight in mitigation to that evidence because it did not represent a broad spectrum of the legal and general communities and because one of the witnesses demonstrated a limited understanding of the most recent charges.