Promises

The Maryland Supreme Court has disbarred a convicted attorney

In its petition for disciplinary or remedial action, the Attorney Grievance Commission alleged that respondent had been found guilty of a serious crime and that he had engaged in professional misconduct as that term is defined in Rule 19- 701(r). Respondent was disbarred by the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia for violation of Rule 8.4 of the District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct and Maryland Rule 19-308.4. Upon the filing of the petition and pursuant to Rules 19-737 and 19-738, the Court issued an order requiring the respondent to show cause why corresponding discipline should not be imposed. Respondent did not respond to the order to show cause.

The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York described the charges in a press release that reported that he had received a nine-year prison sentence

According to the allegations contained in the Complaint and matters included in public filings:

Beginning at least as early as August 2020, O’NEILL engaged in two related fraudulent schemes.

First, O’NEILL engaged in a scheme to defraud a medical equipment company (“Victim-1”) by falsely promising to hold over $5 million of the company’s funds in escrow.  Specifically, in August 2020, Victim-1 entered into an agreement with a Florida-based medical wholesale company (“Seller-1”) for the purchase of personal protective equipment (“PPE”).  In connection with the transaction, Victim-1 and Seller-1 entered into an escrow agreement (the “Escrow Agreement”) with O’Neill & Partners, the firm at which O’NEILL was the managing partner.  Pursuant to the Escrow Agreement, O’Neill & Partners was to act as escrow agent for the transaction and hold $5.1 million deposited by Victim-1 in escrow.  Instead of holding that money as required, however, O’NEILL secretly used the funds to execute personal deals for the purchase of PPE and completely dissipated the funds by approximately November 2020.   

In November 2020, Victim-1 cancelled the transaction and sent a letter to O’Neill & Partners requesting that the $5.1 million in escrowed funds be returned to Victim-1.  When O’Neill & Partners refused to return Victim-1’s money, Victim-1 filed a civil action in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Civil Action”).  In connection with the Civil Action, the Court ordered O’Neill & Partners to deposit the $5.1 million with the Clerk of the Court.  On September 22, 2021, O’NEILL deposited $3.3 million with the Clerk.   

The $3.3 million deposited with the Clerk, however, formed the basis of O’NEILL’s second scheme to defraud.  That money was neither part of the $5.1 million Victim-1 had deposited nor was it O’NEILL’s own money.  Instead, it consisted of funds being held by O’NEILL in escrow for a separate transaction.  In other words, O’NEILL stole $3.3 million from a separate set of escrow clients in an attempt to satisfy the Court’s order in the Civil Action and repay Victim-1. 

(Mike Frisch)