The Law Firm Of Lerner And Rowe
A reciprocal public censure has been imposed by the New York Appellate Division for the Second Judicial Department based on misconduct findings in Arizona
The respondent was admitted to the Arizona Bar on March 25, 2019. On August 9, 2019, Joel Cooper and Pamela Cooper, husband and wife, retained the firm Lerner & Rowe (hereinafter the law firm), after they were injured in a car accident in which Joel was driving and Pamela was the passenger. The respondent was employed by the law firm. Joel and Pamela each executed an individual contingency fee agreement with the law firm. In or about October 2019, the adverse insurer asserted that Joel was comparatively negligent in causing the accident, which in turn created a potential conflict related to the law firm’s representation of Joel and Pamela. On October 16, 2019, Joel and Pamela each executed separate conflict waivers, and the law firm continued to work on their matters.
In or about June 2020, Joel discharged the law firm and hired new counsel, while Pamela remained with the law firm. On July 28, 2020, Joel, through the new counsel, filed a lawsuit against the adverse driver. In August 2020, the respondent was assigned to Pamela’s matter, and on December 18, 2020, the respondent filed a lawsuit on behalf of Pamela against Joel and the adverse driver. The respondent neither sought nor obtained a conflict waiver prior to filing the lawsuit against Joel.
On March 5, 2021, Pamela died of causes unrelated to the accident, and counsel for the adverse driver filed a notice of death statement on March 29, 2021. On June 15, 2021, unaware that his client had passed away, the respondent sent a letter to Pamela to request updated contact information.
A formal complaint was filed by the State Bar of Arizona against the respondent on May 6, 2022. Thereafter, the respondent entered into an Agreement for Discipline by Consent, wherein he conditionally admitted that his conduct violated Arizona RPC rules 1.3 (diligence), 1.4 (communication), and 1.9 (duties to former clients), and agreed to accept discipline in the form of an admonition.
In aggravation, the respondent and the State Bar of Arizona agreed that the respondent had substantial experience in the practice of law. In mitigation, the respondent lacked a prior disciplinary record. According to the Agreement for Discipline by Consent, the respondent is no longer employed by the law firm, and he has his own conflict check systems in place to avoid any conflict issues in the future.
(Mike Frisch)