From Tennessee With Teeth

Two recent Tennessee Supreme Court attorney sanction cases are summarized on the web page of the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility

After a hearing upon the disciplinary petition, a Hearing Panel determined that, while representing a client in a personal injury matter, Mr. Crabtree abandoned his client and the pending litigation, failed to respond to subsequent communications from his client, and failed to turn over the client’s file to successor counsel after the client necessarily retained a new attorney. Further, when Mr. Crabtree was suspended from the practice of law, on November 22, 2022, in unrelated disciplinary proceedings, he failed to notify either his client or opposing counsel of the suspension, as required under Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 28 and per the terms of the Supreme Court’s Order of Suspension. Finally, Mr. Crabtree failed to respond to the Board of Professional Responsibility regarding these disciplinary complaints.

The appointed Hearing Panel determined that Mr. Crabtree’s actions and omissions violated Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3 (diligence), 1.4 (communication); 1.16 (declining or terminating representation); 3.2 (expediting litigation); 3,4(c) (fairness to opposing party and counsel); 8.1(b) (disciplinary matters); and 8.4(g) (misconduct involving failure to comply with a final court order).

And

Effective May 16, 2025, the Supreme Court of Tennessee suspended Linn Marie Guerrero from the practice of law for five (5) years, with two (2) years to be served as an active suspension, pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9, Section 12.2, and the remainder to be served on probation with conditions including engagement of a practice monitor and payment of all Board costs and expenses.

In disciplinary matters arising from five (5) separate complaints of misconduct, Ms. Guerrero engaged in conduct that involved significant conflicts of interest between clients in adverse positions, entered into fee agreements without client authorization, charged excessive and unreasonable fees unsupported by billing records, and abused her fiduciary relationship. Ms. Guerrero further failed to reasonably communicate with or diligently represent clients, failed to protect her client’s interests after withdrawing from matters, and abandoned client matters without returning the client’s property or otherwise protecting their interests.

Ms. Guerrero executed a Conditional Guilty Plea acknowledging her misconduct violated Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct (“RPC”) 1.2 (scope of representation), 1.3 (diligence), 1.4 (communications), 1.5 (fees), 1,7 (conflict of interest: current clients), 1.8 (conflict of interest: specific rules), 1.9 (duties to former clients), 1.16 (terminating representation), 3.2 (expediting litigation), and 8.4(c) and (d) (misconduct).

(Mike Frisch)