Boston Legal Malpractice LawyerThe Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”), located in Boston, Massachusetts, has entered an order suspending an attorney after finding that he had falsely certified that he was covered by professional liability insurance. In the Matter of Eric J. Crane, an attorney accepted appointments from the Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services (“CPCS”) to represent indigent criminal defendants.
Articles Posted in Legal Ethics Issues
In re Jose Luis Serpa, No. BD-2014-025: Attorney Suspended for Charging Client Illegal Fees
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) has entered an order suspending a Boston Attorney after finding that he charged a client an illegal fee. In the Matter of Jose Luis Serpa, the Committee for Public Counsel Services (“CPCS”) appointed an attorney to represent a client in a criminal matter free of charge. Nevertheless, the attorney requested payment of $1,250 from the client, who then paid him $400.
In re Wendy Jane Rickles, No. BD-2013-121: Attorney Disbarred for Misappropriating Client Funds
The Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”), located in Boston, has entered an order disbarring a Massachusetts attorney after finding that she deposited client funds into her personal bank account and used the money for personal expenses. In the Matter of Wendy Jane Rickles, an attorney stole funds from two separate clients, and provided false information to two tribunals.
In re Reinaldo Gonzalez, No. BD-2013-100: Attorney Disbarred for Intentional Misuse of Client Funds
A single justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”), located in Boston, has entered an order disbarring an attorney after finding that he used client funds for personal expenses. In the Matter of Reinaldo Gonzalez, an attorney stole funds belonging to three separate clients.
In re Michael J. Fenton, No. BD-2012-116: Attorney Suspended Indefinitely after Converting Client Funds
A single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”), located in Boston, Massachusetts, has entered an order indefinitely suspending of an attorney after finding that he had misused client funds. In the matter of Michael J. Fenton, an attorney was hired as counsel for the executor of an estate, including as closing attorney for the sale of the decedent’s residence. After the sale closed, the attorney received the proceeds, which were to be distributed equally to the decedent’s three sons.
In re Thomas Eisenstadt, No.BD-2012-067: Attorney Suspended after Keeping Clients’ Settlement Proceeds for Personal Use
A single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) of Massachusetts has entered a judgment suspending a Boston attorney, after finding that he had misappropriated client funds. In the matter of Thomas Eisenstadt, a lawyer received settlement payments on behalf of two clients in unrelated matters and kept the money for himself. He eventually paid the clients their shares, but as a result of his withholding fund, medical liens were not paid.
In re Bernard Kansky, No. BD-2013-085: Massachusetts Attorney Suspended after Intentionally Altering a Court Issued Document
A single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”), has entered a judgment suspending a Boston attorney for a period of three months, after finding that he violated the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct. In the matter of Bernard Kansky, a lawyer represented three of five siblings, who were all beneficiaries of their father’s estate. The father had a retirement account for postal workers, which was not an asset of the estate, but provided that each child was entitled to an equal share of the funds in the account.
The attorney’s clients claimed that the other two children owed money to the estate, which they would likely fail to re-pay if their shares of the retirement account were distributed directly to them. In an attempt to prevent this from occurring, the attorney sent two misleading letters to the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (“FRTIB”), including attaching an altered copy of a temporary restraining order. Additionally, the attorney misled a Probate and Family Court when he failed to inform a judge that the co-administratrix of the estate had opposed an ex parte motion the attorney filed with the court.
In re David R. Ardito, No. BD-2012-102: Attorney Disbarred as a result of Legal Ethics Violations
The Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) in Boston, Massachusetts has entered a judgment of disbarment of a Massachusetts attorney, who practiced law in Rhode Island without a license and misused client funds. In the matter of David R. Ardito, a lawyer had a longstanding friendship with a married couple from Rhode Island. In 2005, the wife sustained personal injuries in an auto accident and as the result of a slip and fall at a local store.
Both incidents occurred in Rhode Island, and although he was not licensed to practice law there, he offered to represent the wife, pro bono. In doing so, the attorney misrepresented his qualifications in violation of Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.16(a)(1). The wife agreed to hire the attorney, and he commenced separate actions against the other driver and the store which constituted the unauthorized practice of law contrary to Mass. R. Prof. C. 5.5(a). Two years later, he settled both cases without informing the couple. He received settlement checks and signed them on behalf of the couple without their authority, deposited the funds into his lawyers trust account, and never dispersed them to the couple.
Over the following years, the wife made repeated inquiries about the status of the cases. The lawyer falsely ensured her that the lawsuits were ongoing. Eventually, the woman became suspicious and filed a petition with the Board of Bar Overseers (“BBO”), who instituted disciplinary proceedings.
In re Derek Beaulieu, Decision No. BD-2012-104: Attorney Suspened after Overcharging the Committee for Public Counsel Services
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”), has suspended an attorney for four years after finding that he charged excessive legal fees in violation of Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.5(a). The Committee for Public Counsel Services (“CPCS”)is headquartered in Boston, but hires private attorneys to provide free legal services to indigent residents of Massachusetts.
In the Matter of Derek Beauleiu, an attorney was regularly retained by the CPCS to represent children and to serve as a guardian ad litem in various Family Court proceedings. In 2008 and 2009, the attorney billed CPCS for approximately 1,800 hours of legal time for each year.
CPCS paid the attorney, but later determined that these figures were exaggerated and instituted disciplinary proceedings against him with the Board of Bar Overseers (“BBO”). After a hearing before the BBO, the board recommended that the attorney be suspended and that the matter be reviewed by the SJC.
Legal Ethics: Benca v. Benton County Circuit Court, No. CR-13-588, Supreme Court of Arkansas Affirms Trial Court’s Order Holding Attorney in Contempt of Court.
The attorney, provides the following summary of a recent legal ethics decision:
The Supreme Court of Arkansas has affirmed a contempt order issued against an attorney. In Benca v. Benton County, an attorney was representing a client at oral argument of a motion to compel discovery. During the proceedings, the presiding judge repeatedly asked the attorney to stop interrupting him, but the attorney failed to heed the judge’s orders. On the sixth disruption, the judge entered an order holding the attorney in contempt of court and fined him $100.
The attorney took a direct appeal to the Supreme Court of Arkansas, which hears all attorney discipline and contempt matters. In order to prevail on appeal, the contemnor must show that there was not substantial evidence to support a finding of contempt, with the facts viewed in the light most favorable to the hearing judge.
The attorney argued that his statements were part of the natural ebb and flow of the oral argument, and thus did not justify a contempt finding. However, upon review of the audio recording and written transcript of the hearing, it was clear the attorney ignored multiple warnings of the hearing judge. The Supreme Court thus affirmed the contempt order.
Decision: Benca v. Benton County