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

Cite as In re Cumfer, 19 DB Rptr 27 (2005)
(e) failed to file a petition for Supreme Court review;
(f) failed to take action to obtain relief from default and extend the time
to file a petition for Supreme Court review;
(g) failed to respond to Ennis’s letters and telephone messages;
(h) failed to communicate with Ennis;
(i) failed to monitor the Ennis Case; and
(j) failed to take action to protect Ennis’s appeal rights.
37.
In or about February 2004, Ennis retained new counsel to represent him. On
or about February 17, 2004, Ennis’s new counsel filed a complaint with the Bar
concerning the Accused’s conduct. On March 8, 2004, Disciplinary Counsel’s Office
forwarded a copy of the complaint to the Accused and requested his response by
March 29, 2004.
38.
On April 2, 2004, the Bar received a letter from the Accused. On April 7,
2004, Disciplinary Counsel’s Office asked the Accused to address Ennis’s allegation
that he had not responded to Ennis’s letters and messages and that he provide the
response by April 21, 2004. The Accused did not respond. On April 23, 2004,
Disciplinary Counsel’s Office again requested the Accused’s response by April 30,
2004. The Accused did not respond.
39.
The Accused admits that the aforesaid conduct constituted conduct prejudicial
to the administration of justice; failure to cooperate and respond to the inquiries of
the disciplinary authorities; and neglect of a legal matter entrusted to him, in
violation of DR 1-102(A)(4), DR 1-103(C), and DR 6-101(B) of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.
Sanction
40.
The Accused and the Bar agree that in fashioning an appropriate sanction in
this case, the ABA Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (hereinafter
“Standards”) are considered. The Standards require that the Accused’s conduct be
analyzed by the following factors: (1) the ethical duty violated; (2) the lawyer’s
mental state; (3) the actual or potential injury; and (4) the existence of aggravating
and mitigating circumstances. Standards, § 3.0.
A. Duty Violated. In violating DR 1-102(A)(4), DR 1-103(C), DR 2-
110(B)(2), DR 5-101(A), DR 6-101(B), and DR 9-101(C)(4), the Accused violated
37