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

Cite as In re Bowles, 19 DB Rptr 140 (2005)
taxes due. Kubbo was injured in that he did not recover the costs incurred or the
attorney fees he paid to the Accused. Vincent and her family were injured. The
Accused failed to take action to terminate the tenancy of the residential premises
when it was not habitable and dangerous to the health and safety of the family, and
effectively left them without counsel in dealing with post court decision issues.
Vincent was also injured when the Accused failed to timely return her documents and
photographs of the conditions of the premises in which she and her family resided.
The Accused did not deliver the photographs until March 2005, over a year after they
should have been returned. Kubbo and Vincent were frustrated and upset because the
Accused failed to communicate with and take action on their behalf. The Accused
also caused injury to the disciplinary authorities. The investigation of the Kubbo
matter was delayed because the Accused failed to respond and provide requested
information and documents in a timely manner.
D. Aggravating Factors. Aggravating factors include:
1. The Accused engaged in a pattern of misconduct by failing to file tax
returns and failing to pay income taxes for three consecutive calendar tax years;
failing to take timely action to assist clients to collect costs and attorney fees; failing
to timely communicate with his clients; failing to maintain a lawyer trust account
since 2001 through early 2005; and failing to prepare and maintain complete records
of clients’ funds and other property. Standards, § 9.22(c).
2. There are multiple offenses. Standards, § 9.22(d).
3. Kubbo and Vincent were vulnerable. Each of them relied on the
Accused to take action to pursue and protect their interests. Standards, § 9.22(h).
E. Mitigating Factors. Mitigating factors include:
1. The Accused has no prior disciplinary record. Standards, § 9.32(a).
2. The Accused asserts he suffered from personal and emotional problems
during times relevant to the complaints. Standards, § 9.32(c).
3. The Accused is remorseful. Standards, § 9.32(m).
24.
The Standards provide that a suspension is generally appropriate when a
lawyer knowingly engages in criminal conduct that seriously reflects on the lawyer’s
fitness to practice. Standards, § 5.12. Suspension is generally appropriate when a
lawyer fails to perform services for a client, or knowingly deceives a client, and
causes injury or potential injury to the client. Standards, §§ 4.42, 4.62. Suspension
is also appropriate when a lawyer knows or should know that he is dealing
improperly with client property and causes injury or potential injury to a client.
Standards, § 4.12. The Standards also provide that suspension is appropriate when
a lawyer knowingly engages in conduct that is a violation of a duty owed as a
147