In Serious Issue
An interlocutory suspension has been ordered by the Ontario Law Society Tribunal Hearing Division
The respondent was sued for unlawfully converting $36,200 to his own use. He put funds provided to him by the plaintiff into a personal account, rather than his trust account, and kept them. The trial judge found that this was an unlawful taking. In addition to ordering him to repay the $36,200 to the plaintiff, she awarded $50,000 in punitive damages against the respondent.
Two of the other allegations are similar to this one, in that they also involve improper handling of trust monies. In one, a client retained the respondent to register a certificate of pending litigation. The respondent deposited the retainer into a non-trust account. He then did the same thing when retained on a family law matter.
A fourth allegation is that the respondent was charged with impaired driving offences and failed to advise the Law Society of the criminal charges.
The fifth and sixth allegations are that the respondent practised law while under suspension for failing to pay his annual fees.
The seventh and eighth allegations relate to a practice review conducted by the Law Society in 2019. The practice review directed the respondent to make a number of changes to his website because the public could be misled by the information displayed there. The Law Society maintains that the respondent either delayed or failed to make the changes required of him by the practice review.
As part of the practice review, the respondent undertook not to prepare any wills. Despite this undertaking, the respondent prepared a will in September 2020, in which he was named as the estate trustee.
The final allegation is about a failure to co-operate with a Law Society investigation.
A Law Society investigator did a search of judgments reported on CanLII where the respondent was counsel. She identified four cases where judges of the Superior Court or Court of Appeal had commented negatively on the respondent’s conduct of the litigation. The Law Society is investigating whether the judgments show that the respondent failed to conduct himself with honour or integrity; failed to be courteous, civil and act in good faith; and failed to provide competent legal services to clients.
The Law Society investigator requested the respondent’s documents in relation to the four files, including retainer agreements, dockets and client communications. It alleges that the respondent has refused to provide a full response to these requests.
Restrictions insufficient
In these circumstances, restrictions on the respondent’s licence would be inadequate. The respondent’s integrity and willingness to comply with his professional obligations are in serious issue. We do not see restrictions that will sufficiently address the risk that we have found. If ordered, we cannot be confident that restrictions will be honoured. The protection of the public and the public interest in the administration of justice can only be ensured by suspending the respondent’s licence.
(Mike Frisch)
Posted in: