STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE

Ethylyn Aldridge , Complainant v. Frederick Baldwin, Respondent

Grievance Complaint #01-0568

DECISION

Pursuant to Practice Book § 2-35, the undersigned, duly-appointed reviewing committee of the Statewide Grievance Committee, conducted a hearing at the Superior Court, 1061 Main Street, Bridgeport, Connecticut on April 10, 2002.  The hearing addressed the record of the complaint filed on January 3, 2002, and the probable cause determination filed by the New Britain Judicial District and Judicial District of Hartford for Geographical Area 12 and the towns of Avon, Bloomfield, Canton, Farmington and West Hartford Grievance Panel on February 27, 2002, finding that there existed probable cause that the Respondent violated Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 and 8.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Notice of the hearing was mailed to the Complainant and to the Respondent on March 5, 2002.  Neither the Complainant nor the Respondent appeared at the hearing.  Accordingly, the undersigned decided this matter based upon the written record.

This reviewing committee finds the following facts by clear and convincing evidence:

In or around 1999, the Complainant retained the Respondent to represent her son in a real estate purchase.  The Respondent was paid a $450.00 retainer for the closing.  The closing on the property was never completed, however, due to a dispute that arose between the sellers of the property.  The dispute did not involve the Complainant’s son.  The Respondent represented to the Complainant and her son that for another $450.00, which was paid to him, he would pursue the sellers for the return of the Complainant's son’s $2,300.00 deposit.  Thereafter, the Respondent periodically reassured the Complainant that an action was pending and he was waiting for a court date.  Approximately one year later, the Complainant discovered that no lawsuit had ever been filed on behalf of her son.  Telephone calls to the Respondent thereafter were unreturned.

The Respondent did not answer the grievance complaint.

This reviewing committee concludes by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent engaged in unethical conduct.  The Respondent's failure to bring the lawsuit that he was retained for clearly demonstrates a failure to act competently in violation of Rule 1.1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct and diligently in violation of Rule 1.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

The Respondent's misrepresentations as to the status of the lawsuit violated Rules 1.4(a) and (b) and 8.4(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.  The Respondent's failure to answer the grievance complaint violated Practice Book § 2-32(a)(1). 

It is the decision of this reviewing committee that the Respondent be presented to the Superior Court for whatever discipline the court deems appropriate.

 _______________________
Attorney Raymond B. Rubens

_______________________
Attorney Rita A. Steinberger

 _______________________
 Mr. William J. Carroll