Reporter - Oregon State Bar

4 in re Tavlor
received a fee of either $280.00 or $350.00 an hour. This was an amount in
addition to a fee of $9,936.00 he received for handling Mr. Wiemals workers'
compensation claim and the amounts he received in representing two of the
health care providers, as discussed below.
Considering all of these factors, the Trial Panel finds that there is clear and
convincing evidence of violation of DR 2-106(A). In the words of DR 2-106(B), it
is the Trial Panel's finding that a lawyer of ordinary prudence would be left with a
definite and firm conviction that the fee was in excess of a reasonable fee
considering the eight factors set forth in that subsection.
Dishonestrvl. Fraud, Deceit or Misre~resentation
DR 1-1 O2(A)(3)
In paragraphs 10-17 of the Formal Complaint against the accused, the Bar
charged the accused with engaging in conduct involving dishonesty or
misrepresentation in violation of DR 1-102(A)(3) due to his failure to disclose in a
Disputed Claim Settlement and Stipulation that he intended to receive fees in
addition to the $9,936.00 fee approved by the Workers' Compensation Hearing
Referee. The accused did obtain additional attorney fees by representing the
health care providers, Salem General Hospital and the Veteran's Administration, in
the recovery of medical expenses expended in the treatment of Mr. Wiemals.
The Trial Panel finds that the Bar did not show by clear and convincing
evidence that Mr. Taylor violated this disciplinary rule in the manner alleged. The
Trial Panel accepted the argument of the accused that collection of a fee for
money received on behalf of Salem General Hospital and the Veterans
Administration was not compensation arising from Mr. Wiemals workers'
compensation case and was not required to be reported to the Hearings Referee.
As pointed out by counsel for the accused, there are separate provisions under