Injunction Violation Leads To Resignation

The Idaho Supreme Court has accepted a resignation in lieu of discipline

Mr. Rogers represented a client, R.J., in a civil case involving allegations that R.J. had wrongfully taken his employer’s gold coins valued at nearly $5 million. In August 2019, the district court entered a stipulated injunction prohibiting R.J., and any attorney acting on his behalf, from selling title to any real property owned by R.J. and from withdrawing or transferring more than $1,000 from any bank account without prior court approval.

R.J. was a titled owner of real property also owned by his nephew. In an effort to obtain funds while the civil case was pending, R.J. demanded that his nephew repay R.J.’s personal loan that the nephew had used to purchase the property. R.J. also requested Mr. Rogers’ assistance in recovering those funds. In March 2020, Mr. Rogers sent an email to the nephew’s wife stating that he had advised R.J. that as co-owner of the property, R.J. had the right to one-half of the equity in the property and could enforce that interest upon any sale of the property. The nephew agreed to pay R.J. $23,000 in exchange for R.J.’s agreement to quitclaim his interest in the property. Mr. Rogers then corresponded with the nephew’s title company, which confirmed that it was preparing a quitclaim deed at the nephew’s request to remove R.J.’s interest in the property in exchange for a $23,000 payment. Mr. Rogers notarized R.J.’s signature on that quitclaim deed and corresponded with the title company about receiving the $23,000 check.

In April 2020, the title company issued a $23,000 check payable to R.J. and delivered to Mr. Rogers at his request. Before he deposited that check into his trust account, Mr. Rogers issued a $23,000 check drawn on his trust account, payable to R.J.’s father. The next day, Mr. Rogers deposited the check from the title company into his trust account. Mr. Rogers did not receive any pecuniary benefit from the deposit of those funds into, or the withdrawal of those funds from, his trust account. He did not inform the district court about the transfer of R.J.’s property interest or the $23,000 payment resulting from that transfer.

In January 2021, opposing counsel discovered the quitclaim deed and $23,000 payment and filed contempt motions against Mr. Rogers and R.J. During his contempt hearing, Mr. Rogers admitted that his conduct violated the injunction, but denied that his conduct in notarizing the quitclaim deed, accepting and depositing the $23,000 check, and issuing the $23,000 check drawn on his trust account to R.J.’s father, was intentional or knowing. He informed the court that based on R.J.’s representations to him, he had misunderstood R.J.’s interest in the property. The court found both Mr. Rogers and R.J. in criminal contempt and imposed fines and sanctions.

Respondent admitted ethics violations and cooperated with the bar investigation.

Sanction

The Idaho Supreme Court accepted Mr. Rogers’ resignation in lieu of disciplinary proceedings. By the terms of the Order, Mr. Rogers may not make application for admission to the Idaho State Bar sooner than five (5) years from the date of his resignation. If he does make such application for admission, he will be required to comply with all the bar admission requirements in Section II of the Idaho Bar Commission Rules and shall have the burden of overcoming the rebuttable presumption of the “unfitness to practice law.”

(Mike Frisch)