Unfinished Business In Bermuda

A recent admonition of the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers

SUMMARY:
While vacationing in Bermuda in 1990, the client and her husband were victims of a burglary. The respondent represented them in recovering their personal property and in attempting to settle their personal injury claims against the resort where the incident occurred. The respondent was able to recover the client’s personal property from the Bermuda police by May 1991 but was unable to settle the personal injury claims.

The client paid the respondent $5,000.00 in December 1992 to retain counsel in Bermuda to bring an action against the resort. The respondent traveled to Bermuda, hired Bermuda counsel for the client, and subsequently assisted Bermuda counsel by obtaining and forwarding information and documents that Bermuda counsel requested. Bermuda counsel commenced an action for the client and her husband against the resort in 1994.

Once Bermuda counsel was engaged, the respondent considered his responsibility to the client completed, and he took no further action of substance. The client, however, had no direct communications with Bermuda counsel, who corresponded directly with the respondent. In addition, the respondent paid Bermuda counsel’s invoices with the balance of the $5,000.00 that the client paid. The respondent did not advise the client that he was not monitoring Bermuda counsel and did not inform her that he had no communication from Bermuda counsel after 1996.

In January 1998, the client hired another Massachusetts attorney to represent her business in an unrelated matter. The client asked her new attorney to ascertain the status of the Bermuda litigation. Bermuda counsel told the client’s new attorney that he had taken no action in the case since September 1996 because the respondent had made no further payments and had not responded to requests for direction.

The respondent’s failure to clarify with his client his responsibility to monitor the Bermuda litigation and his withdrawal from representation without taking reasonable steps to protect his client’s rights violated Canon Two, DR 2-110(A)(2) and Canon Six, DR 6-101(A)(3).

The respondent has been a member of the Bar since 1977. He received an admonition for the above misconduct.

(Mike Frisch)