Fit To Return

Reinstatement should be granted to an attorney convicted of a false statement on a loan application who consented to disbarment, as proposed by an Illinois Hearing Board

His background

After receiving his law license in 1983, Petitioner worked for Continental Bank, reviewing loan documents. He then worked for Prudential Insurance Company as associate regional counsel in the realty group, and the law firm of Albert, Bates, Whitehead and McGaugh, where his practice included handling real estate mergers and acquisitions. (Tr. 180-86, 344-38). In 1998, he became associate dean for institutional research and planning at John Marshall Law School. (Tr. 187).

At John Marshall, Petitioner was responsible for diversity and inclusion and strategic planning. He increased recruiting of diverse students and created a national diversity mock trial competition to generate interest in the law school. (Tr. 197-201). During Petitioner’s time at John Marshall, enrollment of students of color increased from 15 percent to 33 percent. (Tr. 202). Petitioner also worked with students who had impairments or disabilities and created programs to provide academic support to students who needed it. (Tr. 203-208). In addition, he taught a course on real estate transactions as an adjunct faculty member. (Tr. 191, 348).

Beginning in 2005, Petitioner experienced family and financial difficulties. His sister died and his father had Alzheimer’s disease. Petitioner brought his mother to live with him after his sister’s death. (Tr. 248-49). Petitioner’s older daughter started college in 2005 and was experiencing health issues. Petitioner and his wife consulted multiple doctors and obtained inpatient and outpatient care for her, incurring $63,000 in debt for medical expenses. (Tr. 249-50). Petitioner also incurred debt for both daughters’ college tuitions. Because Petitioner’s expenses were greater than his income, he fell behind in his real estate taxes in addition to accumulating a substantial amount of debt. (Tr. 251-53). Petitioner felt he was responsible for keeping his family in their home to maintain a sense of stability.

Proof on reinstatement

We find Petitioner has met his burden of establishing his rehabilitation. While Petitioner engaged in serious misconduct, we consider that his wrongful acts were part of a misguided attempt to keep his home, no matter the cost, during a difficult and stressful period of time. He cooperated with the government, acknowledged his guilt, and has not practiced law for six years. We find credible the testimony of Petitioner’s witnesses that his misconduct was an aberration, and Petitioner is a person of high character who contributes significantly to his community. Based on our observations of Respondent, we find he understands the wrongfulness of his past conduct, is remorseful, and is fully rehabilitated. He has maintained his knowledge of the law by completing 36 hours of continuing legal education. We believe he will be able to return to practice without harm to the public and has much to contribute to the legal profession.

We recognize that Petitioner is still in debt, but we have confidence he will continue to meet his financial obligations and will not repeat his misconduct.

(Mike Frisch)