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

Cite as In re Johnson, 19 DB Rptr 324 (2005)
intended by his misrepresentations to Tomassi to excuse his delay in obtaining the
appointment of a guardian and thereby gain additional time in which to obtain it, he
did not intend to harm Carr, Tomassi, or the proposed ward.
C. Injury. The Accused’s client suffered no actual injury. The delay in the
resolution of the client’s case and the Accused’s having misrepresented the cause of
this delay could have caused the client to postpone taking other steps to prosecute
her case until actual injury did occur.
D. Aggravating Factors. Aggravating factors include:
1. The Accused acted with a selfish motive. Standards, § 9.22(a).
2. The Accused engaged in a pattern of misconduct extending over about
seven months. Standards, § 9.22(c).
3. The Accused committed multiple disciplinary offenses. Standards,
§ 9.22(d).
E. Mitigating Factors. Mitigating factors include:
1. The Accused has no prior disciplinary record. Standards, § 9.32(a).
2. The Accused has displayed a cooperative attitude toward these
proceedings. Standards, § 9.32(e).
3. The Accused was experiencing personal or emotional problems.
Standards, § 9.32(c).
F. Preliminary Sanction. Standards § 4.42 suggests that suspension is
generally appropriate when a lawyer knowingly fails to perform services for a client
and causes injury or potential injury to a client. Standards § 4.62 suggests that
suspension is generally appropriate when a lawyer knowingly deceives a client, and
causes injury or potential injury to a client.
10.
Oregon case law is in accord. See In re Morrow, 297 Or 808, 688 P2d 820
(1984) (lawyer suspended for 60 days for violation of DR 1-102(A)(3), DR 6-101(A),
and ORS 9.480(4)); In re LaBahn, 335 Or 357, 67 P3d 381 (2003) (lawyer
suspended for 60 days for a single violation of DR 6-101(B)); In re Morrow, 303 Or
102, 109, 734 P2d 867 (1987) (when court wrote that a suspension of from 60 to 120
days would be appropriate when a lawyer neglected a legal matter and then lied to
his client about his failure to act).
11.
Consistent with the Standards and Oregon case law, the parties agree that the
Accused shall be suspended for a period of 90 days for violation of DR 1-102(A)(3),
DR 6-101(B), and DR 7-102(A)(5), the sanction to be effective beginning on the
third day after the approval of this Stipulation by the Disciplinary Board.
327