STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE

Jeffrey Adams, Complainant vs. Robert Izzo, Respondent

Grievance Complaint #01-0767

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, 95 Washington Street, Hartford, Connecticut on August 8, 2002.  The hearing addressed the record of the complaint filed on March 4, 2002, and the probable cause determination filed by the New Britain Judicial District, Hartford Geographical Area 12 and the towns of Avon, Bloomfield, Canton, Farmington and West Hartford Grievance Panel on May 15, 2002, finding that there existed probable cause that the Respondent violated Rules 1.15 and 8.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Practice Book Section 2-32(a)(1).

Notice of the hearing was mailed to the Complainant and to the Respondent on June 25, 2002. At the hearing neither the Complainant nor the Respondent appeared.

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

The Complainant retained the Respondent to represent him for a closing on a home located in Meriden, Connecticut (hereinafter referred to as the "Meriden Property") on December 20, 2000.  At the time of the loan proceeds disbursement, the Complainant owed the Internal Revenue Service (hereinafter referred to as the "IRS") $3,893.32 in unpaid taxes.  The Complainant instructed the Respondent to pay the debt from the loan proceeds.  The Respondent included the payment to the IRS in the loan disbursement settlement sheet he provided to the Complainant. Notwithstanding the fact that the Respondent received sufficient funding from the loan to pay off the debt to the IRS, the Respondent failed to pay the debt on behalf of the Complainant.  The Complainant learned the Respondent had not paid the debt to the IRS when the IRS levied his bank account. The Respondent did not answer the grievance complaint.

This reviewing committee concludes by clear and convincing evidence that the Respondent engaged in ethical misconduct.  The Respondent was retained to represent the Complainant at a closing where the Complainant had directed the Respondent to pay an IRS debt out of the loan proceeds. The Respondent received sufficient funds in which to pay the debt to the IRS on behalf of the Complainant. The Respondent failed to pay the debt to the IRS in violation of Rules 1.15 and 8.4(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. The respondent failed to answer the grievance complaint in violation of Practice Book §2-32(a)(1).  

This reviewing committee finds that the Respondent's violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct and the Practice Book constitute serious misconduct and warrant the imposition of discipline.  Accordingly, we order the Respondent presented to the Superior Court for the imposition of whatever discipline the Court deems appropriate.

___________________________________
Attorney Vincent DeAngelo

___________________________________
Ms. Johanna Kimball