Cozen Lawyer Involved in Past Hit-and-Run Faces Public Censure
A D.C. disciplinary committee found that Wayne Rohde failed to disclose past proceedings against him.
September 27, 2019 at 04:28 PM
4 minute read
Washington, D.C., disciplinary officials on Friday recommended publicly censuring a Cozen O'Connor lawyer for allegedly concealing a past disciplinary charge relating to a 2004 hit-and-run.
The three-member committee found that the Board on Professional Responsibility's disciplinary arm—the Office of Disciplinary Counsel—proved "by clear and convincing evidence" that Cozen lawyer Wayne Rohde, identified on the firm's website as a member, broke Virginia's rules of professional conduct when he failed to disclose his pending disciplinary charges on a pro hac vice application in 2010.
The committee recommended public censure over a more severe sanction, however, finding that no client was prejudiced and no party suffered material injury as a result.
"Attorney dishonesty is always serious, and dishonesty to a tribunal even more so," the committee wrote. "But respondent's dishonesty here was limited to two brief instances, and was not part of an overall scheme to mislead for personal gain."
Rohde and the disciplinary counsel, Hamilton Fox, have seven days to decide whether to appeal the committee's findings and recommendation. After that, it will go before the Board on Professional Responsibility and then the D.C. Court of Appeals, which has the final say.
Fox said he hadn't decided yet how he will proceed. Rohde declined to comment.
"[A public censure] doesn't prevent him from practicing law, but it's not a good thing to have happen to you," Fox said. "Any time someone googles Mr. Rohde's name, it's going to pop up."
The 2004 hit-and-run occurred while Rohde was an associate at Sher & Blackwell and struggling with alcoholism, according to the hearing committee's findings. The Friday report noted that Rohde is "substantially rehabilitated—having completed treatment for alcoholism, been a long-term participant in Alcoholics Anonymous, and abstaining from alcohol since October 2004."
According to the hearing committee, Rohde "did not remain at the scene of the collision, where the other driver was severely injured and trapped in her vehicle."
Rohde pleaded guilty in August 2005 to a felony hit-and-run charge. An Arlington County, Virginia, judge gave Rohde a suspended two-year prison sentence, placing him on supervised probation. He was also ordered to pay costs of $405.
Sher & Blackwell never took any action against Rohde, but the disciplinary counsel's office began pursing the matter in 2005.
Rohde's case languished for years, a common occurrence, Fox said. A hearing committee didn't issue its findings and recommendations until 2015, and the D.C. Court of Appeals didn't approve those until August 2018. The court placed Rohde on supervised probation for three years after lifting a two-year suspension.
"We have a very slow and cumbersome system," Fox said.
In 2010, as Rohde's case sat before a hearing committee, Sher & Blackwell merged with Cozen, and Rohde, who disclosed the pending matter to his new firm, became a member there.
Shortly thereafter, Rohde, whose practice revolves around the international ocean transportation industry, was recruited by one of his colleagues to help work on a case in Virginia federal court involving Damco, a global shipping company.
Licensed to practice in D.C., Rohde filled out a Virginia pro hac vice application, but he did not disclose the pending disciplinary charges against him, which the hearing committee on Friday found violated Virginia's rules of professional conduct. Virginia's application required Rohde to certify by signature that he had "not been reprimanded in any court nor [had] there been any action in any court pertaining to [his] conduct or fitness as a member of the bar."
Fox's office also alleged that Rohde broke similar rules in New York and Washington. Rohde didn't disclose his disciplinary charges on a New York pro hac vice application in 2011. However, the hearing committee did not agree with those charges.
A representative from Cozen did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
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 AllTo Ease Partner Pay Tensions, Some Law Firms Are Seeking 'Middle Ground' in Transparency
5 minute readSo You Want to Be a Tech Lawyer? Consider Product Counseling
BCLP Exploring Merger Prospects as Profitability Lags, Partnership Shrinks
Trending Stories
- 1Del. Court Holds Stance on Musk's $55.8B Pay Rescission, Awards Shareholder Counsel $345M
- 2Another Senior Boeing Attorney Exits, This One for CLO Post at Jet-Maintenance Company
- 3Bridge the Communication Gap: The Benefits of Having (and Being) a Bilingual Mediator
- 4CFIUS Is Locked and Loaded, but What Lies Ahead for CFIUS Enforcement Activity?
- 5Deluge of Trump-Leary Government Lawyers Join Job Market, Setting Up Free-for-All for Law Firm, In-House Openings
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