Wild Wild ... East—900 Connecticut Attorneys Faced Discipline in Last 5 Years
In five years, disciplinary committees in Connecticut doled out 244 presentments, 105 reprimands, 31 continuing legal education orders and 16 disbarments to lawyers charged with ethics violations.
September 23, 2019 at 04:40 PM
3 minute read
A Connecticut Law Tribune analysis of attorney discipline cases between January 2014 and August 2019 revealed that missed deadlines, lack of communication with clients, improper bookkeeping, financial mismanagement and crime are major stumbling blocks for lawyers.
Attorneys were accused of 2,176 violations during the roughly five-year period. Although most grievance complaints didn't make it to the prosecution stage, those that did resulted in about 244 presentments, 105 reprimands, 31 continuing legal education orders, 16 disbarments and 190 dismissals.
Connecticut is home to about 21,030 attorneys, according to the American Bar Association's 2019 lawyer population survey.
The most troubling cases, according to Connecticut's chief disciplinary counsel Brian Staines, are those involving Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts, or IOLTA. Staines said random audits conducted on behalf of the Statewide Grievance Committee often showed lawyers weren't properly maintaining accounts or adequately protecting client's funds.
|What were the key findings?
|- Attorneys were accused of 2,176 ethics violations.
- Of 878 cases, 190 were dismissed.
- Big Law attorneys and prosecutors rarely face discipline.
- Mishandling or stealing client's money is usually a straight shot to suspension or disbarment.
- Seven rules accounted for more than 1,800 violations.
- The best way to reemerge on the right side of a charge is to stay calm, apologize and be honest, according to experts.
Source: The Connecticut Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel discipline cases between January 2014 and August 2019.
Safekeeping property was a particularly thorny area, as attorneys faced 317 violations for using client funds for personal expenses and other missteps.
Mishandling or stealing client's money proved a surefire way to land the most severe sanctions, consistently resulting in suspensions and disbarments, while communication issues and first-time trust account violations typically resulted in mandatory continuing legal education.
While prosecutors and Big Law attorneys barely received a mention, senior attorneys with solo practices or small firms were disproportionately vulnerable to complaints and discipline. And they tend to fall into one of three categories: bad actors who stole money or abused their position; attorneys who missed a statute of limitations on a case or had a particularly difficult client; or lawyers struggling with burnout, mental health issues or substance abuse problems.
Some violations could only be described as "miscellaneous." One lawyer got in trouble for bad-mouthing a former friend to organizations and public boards, while another manufactured a string of reasons to avoid dealing with a client, including a computer virus and a cat bite.
Related stories:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllConnecticut's 7 Trickiest Bar Rules Tripped Up Hundreds of Lawyers
Corey Brinson's Long Road Back: Disgraced Lawyer's Quest for Redemptive Life
7 minute read'Sociopaths and Lawyers': Former Disciplinarian Offers Tips to Attorneys
5 minute read'They Can't Get Out of Bed': The Mental-Health Specter in Attorney-Discipline Cases
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250