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

Cite as In re Eichelberger, 19 DB Rptr 329 (2005)
4. The Accused made full disclosure to the Bar in these proceedings.
Standards, § 9.32(e).
5. The Accused has a good reputation in the construction practice area of
law and in the Salem community. Standards, § 9.32(g).
6. The Accused is remorseful for any injury he may have caused to Harris
and for failing to follow the rules of the profession. Standards, § 9.32(m).
19.
The Standards provide 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,
§ 4.32.
20.
Oregon case law is in accord. The Oregon Supreme Court has stated that a
single violation of DR 5-105, by itself, justifies a 30-day suspension. In re
Knappenberger, 337 Or 15, 33, 90 P3d 614 (2004); In re Wyllie, 331 Or 606, 625,
19 P3d 338 (2001) (four-month suspension for knowing failure to disclose conflict
and fee issues); In re Hockett, 303 Or 150, 164, 734 P2d 877 (1987). See also In re
Robertson, 290 Or 639, 624 P2d 603 (1981) (30-day suspension for representing
buyers and sellers in transaction).
This case is similar to In re Baer, 298 Or 29, 688 P2d 1324 (1984), in which
the court determined that a 60-day suspension was appropriate for violations similar
to that of the Accused. See also In re Gant, 293 Or 130, 645 P2d 293 (1982) (30-day
suspension for violation of DR 5-101(A), 5-105(C), and other rules in connection
with business ventures with a client followed by adverse representation of that same
client); In re Wittemyer, 328 Or 448, 980 P2d 148 (1999) (four-month suspension for
a conflict of interest in representing both an individual client and a corporate client
as to a loan from individual client and lawyer to the corporate client); In re Gildea,
325 Or 281, 936 P2d 975 (1997) (120-day suspension for violations of DR 5-101(A),
and other rules, for failing to obtain consent from a client after full disclosure for
transfer of title to the client’s vehicle to the lawyer’s professional corporation).
21.
Consistent with the Standards and Oregon case law, the parties agree that the
Accused shall be suspended for 60 days for violations of DR 5-101(A) (two counts)
and DR 5-105(C) (two counts), the sanction to be effective November 9, 2005, or the
day after approval by the Disciplinary Board, whichever is later.
335