Without Authority

A summary of a public reprimand on the web page of the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers

The respondent was retained by a client in April of 2022 to defend two ongoing summary process actions filed by the client’s landlord for back rent and possession. During the course of representation of the client, the respondent determined that the client had no viable defenses to his failure to pay rent. The matters were scheduled for trial by the court. The respondent notified the client of the trial date as well as the requirement that he appear for the trial. The client did not appear for the trial. Given the client’s failure to appear for trial, the respondent was convinced that settlement of the matter was the best outcome for the client based upon the facts and determined that a default judgment would be a worse outcome than a settlement for a sum certain because a default would subject the client to fees and interest. The respondent agreed to settle the claims at the time of trial without the client’s authority to settle the matters. The following day, after learning of the settlement, the client filed a pro se motion seeking relief from the judgment entered against him. The court scheduled the client’s motion for hearing, the respondent failed to appear at the hearing and the court dismissed the motion.

In aggravation, the respondent had a history of prior discipline. In 2016, the respondent received a six-month suspension, and stayed for two years with an accounting probation. The underlying misconduct, however, was unrelated to the misconduct at issue. Instead, the prior misconduct related primarily to the respondent’s real estate conveyancing practice and occurred between 1998 and 2014. Thus, the prior discipline had minimal weight in the sanction analysis based on the totality of circumstances.

(Mike Frisch)