continued from page 10
Counsel submitted that, in the absence of some compelling evidence of illness, a decision short of disbarment would provide a message to the profession that is inconsistent with the high value that is placed on integrity of the profession and the importance of the safety of trust property.
The Hearing Committee ordered a referral to the Attorney General, and ordered that A. pay hearing costs of $5,000.
Reprimand of and Fine for B.
The departure of an experienced conveyancer, a busy real estate practice and a heavy reliance on staff, were significant factors in B.'s failure to respond in a timely manner to communications from another member of the LSA.
An urban general practitioner since his admission to the LSA in 1977, B. relied heavily on his staff to keep him up to date on correspondence. He candidly admitted to a LSA Hearing Committee he was not diligent in keeping current with his correspondence.
On September 5, 2008, the Hearing Committee was faced with a citation dealing with timely responses to communications from another member of the LSA. The Committee concluded that this was a breach of Chapter 4, Rule 5 of the LSA Code of Professional Conduct. The commentary in that Chapter includes the following:
a. Good relations among members of the bar are important from several perspectives. They contribute to the effective and expeditious dispatch of client's business while enhancing working conditions for lawyers. To the extent that dealings among counsel are observed by the public, polite and professional conduct fosters respect for lawyers on an individual and collective basis.
b. Responding promptly to telephone calls and correspondence and being punctual for appointments are important aspects of courteous professional dealings. Even in circumstances in which the information sought or ought not to be provided, the lawyer is ethically obliged to courteously recognize the request. |
 |
The Hearing Committee noted in its report that the LSA will act when it finds that "the actions of an individual member would impugn the reputation of all members of the LSA." B. was reprimanded and fined $2,000 as well as costs of the hearing.
Citation against C. Dismissed
A citation brought against a C. with regards to failing to render statements of account to a complainant in a timely manner was dismissed by a LSA Hearing Committee which observed that the business practises of C. had improved.
The Committee noted that it accepted the evidence of C. and his belief that he sent his accounts to the complainant, and it also accepted the evidence of the complainant that she did not receive the accounts from C. The Committee noted in its report that the complainant did not receive the accounts due to "inadvertence and faulty business practices" on the part of C. and that it was not conduct deserving of sanction. Further, the Committee observed that the business practices of C. in rendering and communicating accounts to clients had improved since this matter occurred.
During the hearing, C. testified that at the time in question he shared a junior assistant on a part-time basis, and used his computer and email extensively in his practice. He noted that he generated all correspondence to the complainants on the file in question and that all communications were sent by email and not by post. C. noted that his current practice is now to send all accounts by mail, email and by fax. His current practice is to immediately print any emails received and sent and to ensure his files are properly organized.
Counsel for C. noted that the trust reconciliation of C. supports that the accounts were rendered and paid. Counsel submitted that this case demonstrates a problem with email and communication by that means, and is not a matter for sanction. Counsel further submitted that the matters in question show poor business practises on the part of C. and do not speak to his ethics. |
