P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar$

Cite as In re Nester, 19 DB Rptr 134 (2005) E. Mitigating Factors. The mitigating factors applicable to this case include: 1. Absence of a prior disciplinary record. Standards, § 9.32(a); and 2. Absence of a dishonest or selfish motive. Standards, § 9.32(b). 13. Standards § 4.33 suggests that a public reprimand is generally appropriate when a lawyer is negligent in determining whether the representation of a client may be materially affected by the lawyer’s own interests and causes injury or potential injury to a client. Standards § 7.3 suggests that a public reprimand is appropriate when a lawyer negligently engages in conduct that is a violation of a duty owed as a professional and causes injury or potential injury to a client, the public, or the legal system. Standards § 4.32 suggests that suspension is generally appropriate when a lawyer knows of a conflict of interest and does not fully disclose to a client the possible effect of that conflict, and causes injury or potential injury to a client. Standards § 7.2 suggests that suspension is generally appropriate when a lawyer knowingly engages in conduct that is a violation of a duty owed as a professional, and causes injury or potential injury to a client, the public, or the legal system. 14. Oregon case law suggests that a short period of suspension, not a public reprimand, is the appropriate sanction in this case. In In re Schaffner, 323 Or 472, 481, 918 P2d 803 (1996), the Supreme Court stated that a 60-day suspension is an appropriate sanction for one intentional violation of DR 1-103(C). See also In re Worth, 336 Or 256, 278, 82 P3d 605 (2003). The Disciplinary Board has determined that a 30-day suspension is an appropriate sanction when the lawyer violated DR 1-103(C) for making a false statement to the Bar without first determining the truth or falsity of that statement, and for violation of DR 2-101(A), DR 2-110(A)(2), and DR 6-101(B). In re Mendez, 10 DB Rptr 129 (1996). With respect to the Accused’s self-interest conflict, the court has also typically imposed a short period of suspension when a conflict is so obvious that the lawyer should know better. In re Robertson, 290 Or 639, 624 P2d 603 (1981); In re Hockett, 303 Or 150, 164, 734 P2d 877 (1987); In re Gant, 293 Or 130, 137, 645 P2d 23 (1982). 15. Consistent with the Standards and Oregon case law, the parties agree that the Accused shall be suspended for a period of 30 days for violation of DR 5-101(A) and DR 1-103(C), the sanction to be effective beginning on June 3, 2005. 138
Cite as In re Nester, 19 DB Rptr 134 (2005) 16. This Stipulation for Discipline is subject to review by Disciplinary Counsel of the Oregon State Bar. The sanction provided for herein was approved by the Chair of the SPRB on March 17, 2005. If approved by the SPRB, the parties agree the stipulation is to be submitted to the Disciplinary Board for consideration under the terms of BR 3.6. EXECUTED this 3rd day of May 2005. EXECUTED this 6th day of May 2005. /s/ Mary A. Nester Mary A. Nester OSB No. 93381 OREGON STATE BAR By: /s/ Martha M. Hicks Martha M. Hicks OSB No. 75167 Assistant Disciplinary Counsel 139
Page 1:
white text DISCIPLINARY BOARD REPOR
Page 4 and 5:
white text PREFACE This Disciplinar
Page 6 and 7:
white text Justices of the Oregon S
Page 8 and 9:
white text 2005 DISCIPLINARY BOARD
Page 10 and 11:
Cases Reported in Volume 19 In re C
Page 12 and 13:
Cases Reported in Volume 19 In re K
Page 14 and 15:
Cases Reported in Volume 19 In re S
Page 16 and 17:
Cite as In re Klahn, 19 DB Rptr 1 (
Page 18 and 19:
Cite as In re Klahn, 19 DB Rptr 1 (
Page 20 and 21:
Cite as In re Dobie, 19 DB Rptr 6 (
Page 22 and 23:
Cite as In re Dobie, 19 DB Rptr 6 (
Page 24 and 25:
Cite as In re Botta, 19 DB Rptr 10
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Cite as In re Henricksen, 19 DB Rpt
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Cite as In re Koblegarde, 19 DB Rpt
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Cite as In re Cumfer, 19 DB Rptr 27
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Cite as In re Ryan, 19 DB Rptr 41 (
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Cite as In re Summer, 19 DB Rptr 57
Page 74 and 75:
Cite as In re Rich, 19 DB Rptr 60 (
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Cite as In re Ames, 19 DB Rptr 66 (
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Cite as In re Trukositz, 19 DB Rptr
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103: Cite as In re Steele, 19 DB Rptr 87
Page 110 and 111: Cite as In re Knappenberger, 19 DB
Page 112 and 113: Cite as In re Scharfstein, 19 DB Rp
Page 120 and 121: Cite as In re Casey, 19 DB Rptr 105
Page 122 and 123: Cite as In re Casey, 19 DB Rptr 105
Page 124 and 125: Cite as In re Genna, 19 DB Rptr 109
Page 130 and 131: Cite as In re Davis, 19 DB Rptr 116
Page 136 and 137: Cite as In re Crews, 19 DB Rptr 122
Page 138 and 139: Cite as In re Coggins, 19 DB Rptr 1
Page 140 and 141: Cite as In re Leisure, 19 DB Rptr 1
Page 142 and 143: Cite as In re Shinn, 19 DB Rptr 128
Page 148 and 149: Cite as In re Nester, 19 DB Rptr 13
Page 150 and 151: Cite as In re Nester, 19 DB Rptr 13
Page 154 and 155: Cite as In re Bowles, 19 DB Rptr 14
Page 164 and 165: Cite as In re Gregory, 19 DB Rptr 1
Page 166 and 167: Cite as In re Gregory, 19 DB Rptr 1
Page 168 and 169: Cite as In re Lebenbaum, 19 DB Rptr
Page 174 and 175: Cite as In re DenHartigh, 19 DB Rpt
Page 180 and 181: Cite as In re Monson, 19 DB Rptr 16
Page 182 and 183: Cite as In re Monson, 19 DB Rptr 16
Page 184 and 185: Cite as In re Hendrick, 19 DB Rptr
Page 194 and 195: Cite as In re Goyak, 19 DB Rptr 179
Page 202 and 203:
Cite as In re Goyak, 19 DB Rptr 179
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Cite as In re Matthews, 19 DB Rptr
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Cite as In re Kay, 19 DB Rptr 200 (
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Cite as In re Foley, 19 DB Rptr 205
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Cite as In re Langford, 19 DB Rptr
Page 228 and 229:
Cite as In re Langford, 19 DB Rptr
Page 230 and 231:
Cite as In re Tuttle, 19 DB Rptr 21
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Cite as In re Andersen, 19 DB Rptr
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Cite as In re Jackson, 19 DB Rptr 2
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Cite as In re Richardson, 19 DB Rpt
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Cite as In re Lancefield, 19 DB Rpt
Page 264 and 265:
Cite as In re Lancefield, 19 DB Rpt
Page 266 and 267:
Cite as In re Simcoe, 19 DB Rptr 25
Page 268 and 269:
Cite as In re Simcoe, 19 DB Rptr 25
Page 270 and 271:
Cite as In re Damiano, 19 DB Rptr 2
Page 272 and 273:
Cite as In re Damiano, 19 DB Rptr 2
Page 274 and 275:
Cite as In re Oliveros, 19 DB Rptr
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Cite as In re Gibbons, 19 DB Rptr 2
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Cite as In re Lyons, 19 DB Rptr 271
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Cite as In re Marsh, 19 DB Rptr 277
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Cite as In re O’Dell, 19 DB Rptr
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Cite as In re Carreon, 19 DB Rptr 2
Page 314 and 315:
Cite as In re Carreon, 19 DB Rptr 2
Page 316 and 317:
Cite as In re Miller, 19 DB Rptr 30
Page 318 and 319:
Cite as In re Miller, 19 DB Rptr 30
Page 320 and 321:
Cite as In re Derby, 19 DB Rptr 306
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
Cite as In re Idiart, 19 DB Rptr 31
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Cite as In re Chase, 19 DB Rptr 322
Page 338 and 339:
Cite as In re Johnson, 19 DB Rptr 3
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342 and 343:
Page 344 and 345:
Cite as In re Eichelberger, 19 DB R
Page 346 and 347:
Page 348 and 349:
Page 350 and 351:
Page 352 and 353:
Cite as In re Camacho, 19 DB Rptr 3
Page 354 and 355:
Page 356 and 357:
Page 358 and 359:
Cite as In re White, 19 DB Rptr 343
Page 360 and 361:
Page 362 and 363:
Page 364 and 365:
Page 366 and 367:
Cite as In re Kahn, 19 DB Rptr 351
Page 368 and 369:
Page 370 and 371:
Page 372 and 373:
Cite as In re Wilson, 19 DB Rptr 35
Page 374 and 375:
Page 376 and 377:
Page 378 and 379:
Cite as In re Dickerson, 19 DB Rptr
Page 380 and 381:
Cite as In re Dickerson, 19 DB Rptr
Page 382 and 383:
Cite as In re Peterson, 19 DB Rptr
Page 384 and 385:
Page 386 and 387:
Page 389 and 390:
TABLE OF CASES (References are to t
Page 391 and 392:
Table of Cases In re Jordan, 295 Or
Page 393 and 394:
Table of Cases In re Wyllie, 331 Or
Page 395 and 396:
Table of Rules and Statutes DR 3-10
Page 397 and 398:
Table of Rules and Statutes DR 7-11
Page 399:
TABLE OF BAR RULES OF PROCEDURE (Re
show all

P:\CLEPUB\Books\Disciplinary Board Reporter ... - Oregon State Bar

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?