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

Cite as In re Derby, 19 DB Rptr 306 (2005)
do so. The Accused received a second notice from the court dated July 10, 2002,
again requesting that an Amended Inventory be filed within 14 days. That letter
informed the Accused that the court would issue a citation if no inventory were filed.
Coos County had relatively strict timelines for each step in the probate process, but
rarely had to take the extraordinary step issuing a citation to the Personal
Representative.
When the Accused did not respond to the July 10 notice, Judge Bechtold
issued a citation ordering the Personal Representative in Coos County Court on
August 12, 2002, and show cause why she should not be removed for failing to
properly file the inventory. Prior to that show-cause date, the Accused filed an
Amended Inventory on August 8, 2002.
In late September 2002, Judge Bechtold notified the Accused that he was
required to submit three compliance affidavits within 28 days, again according to
court deadlines. The Accused timely filed only one of the three required compliance
affidavits, so in early November 2002, Judge Bechtold again notified the Accused
that the two remaining compliance affidavits were outstanding. The Accused did not
respond to the court either by filing the affidavits or submitting an explanation for
not doing so. On December 12, 2002, Judge Bechtold notified the Accused that he
must file the two compliance affidavits within 14 days or the court would issue a
citation. When the Accused did not respond, the court issued a citation on December
31, 2002, ordering the Personal Representative to appear and show cause why she
should not be removed for failure to file the proper affidavits. The Accused appeared
at the hearing on January 13, 2003, and filed one of the remaining affidavits, but did
not file the Affidavit of Publication from the local newspaper. He did provide a
receipt from the local newspaper showing that he had, on that date, submitted a
notice to be published so that an Affidavit of Publication could subsequently be filed.
When the Final Accounting became overdue, Judge Bechtold sent another
notice to the Accused dated May 20, 2003, stating that he was required to file it
within 28 days or submit a motion and affidavit stating why he needed additional
time to do so. Again, the Accused did not respond to the court either by motion and
affidavit or by filing the final accounting. Judge Bechtold issued a third citation on
August 1, 2003, ordering the Personal Representative to appear and show cause why
she should not be removed. The Personal Representative appeared at the hearing but
the Accused failed to appear. He did not have an explanation for that failure.
Following that hearing, Judge Bechtold sent the Accused a notice on September 2,
2003, stating that Ms. Bonebrake had not been removed as Personal Representative
and warning the Accused that he needed to communicate with his client and conclude
the probate. She further stated that if the Accused did not take the necessary actions
immediately, she would notify the Oregon State Bar.
The Accused subsequently drafted the final accounting but did not submit it
to the court. At that point, the Accused had learned that there were a number of
additional creditors who had potential claims against the estate and that such creditors
309