Sober But Noncompliant

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court extended the probation of an attorney based on the recommendation of its Disciplinary Board.

The attorney is in compliance with sobriety requirements but had not fully complied with an obligation to meet with his sobriety monitor

The record established that Respondent’s inability to meet his conditions is not a question of his sobriety, as he has abstained from alcohol and drug use and regularly attends AA meetings and has contact with his AA sponsor. Rather, Respondent has been unwilling or unable to prioritize scheduling meetings with Attorney A and adhering to a fixed schedule. The totality of the record reflects that although Respondent did not fully comply with the probation requirements to maintain a certain level of contact with his sobriety monitor, he explained the reasons surrounding his failure to do so, discussed improved healthcare and medications that enable him to better meet his obligations, shared his efforts to meet his requirements during the current quarter, and expressed his sincere intentions to meet the conditions of probation going forward. Importantly, Respondent demonstrated recognition that he is under a Supreme Court order to meet with his sobriety monitor at least twice monthly and maintain telephone contact weekly and that he must fulfill those specific conditions, in addition to other conditions set forth in the Court’s Order.

Critical to my recommendation to extend probation is the fact that Respondent has remained sober during the period of probation. Respondent’s probation conditions are in place for the protection of the public. I conclude that there is no evidence that Respondent harmed any clients or that he is unfit to practice law and poses a danger to the public. Under these circumstances, a modification of the length of probation is appropriate to address Respondent’s noncompliance and to allow him the opportunity for full compliance, with the understanding that any further violation of these terms and conditions by Respondent may subject him to revocation of his probation and immediate suspension. To be clear, the conditions of probation set forth in the Court’s Order are not negotiable; Respondent must meet them or he will be in front of the Board again.

(Mike Frisch)