Besrihun Assfaw, Complainant vs.
Grievance Complaint #02-0919
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,
300 Grand Street, Waterbury, Connecticut
on November 4, 2003. The hearing
addressed the record of the complaint filed on March 24, 2003, and the probable
cause determination filed by the New Britain Judicial District and the Judicial
District of Hartford for Geographical Area 12 and the towns of Avon,
Bloomfield, Canton, Farmington and West Hartford Grievance Panel on August 5,
2003, finding that there existed probable cause that the Respondent violated
Rules 1.1, 1.3 and 1.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Practice Book
§2-32(a)(1). The hearing also addressed
an additional probable cause determination filed by this reviewing committee on
October 20, 2003, finding that probable cause existed that the Respondent
violated Rule 1.16(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
Notice
of the hearing was mailed to the Complainant and to the Respondent on October
6, 2003. The Complainant appeared and
testified. The Respondent did not
appear.
This reviewing
committee finds the following facts by clear and convincing evidence:
In
1995, the Complainant retained the Respondent to represent him in a personal
injury claim. The Complainant's injuries
arose from a slip and fall accident at a Greyhound Bus terminal that occurred
on or about February 23, 1994.
Subsequent to the injury, the Complainant relocated to
Beginning
in late 1997, the Complainant began to experience difficulty communicating with
the Respondent. The Complainant made
numerous telephone calls to the Respondent that were not returned. In July of 2001, the Complainant traveled
from
The
Complainant hired Attorney David Leff to bring a malpractice action against the
Respondent. Assfaw v. Gall,
Superior Court, judicial district of New Haven, Docket No. 0464243 (May 14,
2002). Attorney Leff also made several
unsuccessful attempts to obtain the Complainant's file from the
Respondent.
The
Respondent did not answer the grievance complaint.
This
reviewing committee also considered the following:
On
April 26, 2004, the Respondent was suspended from the practice of law for
failing to pay his clients' security fund fee pursuant to Practice Book
§2-70(b). The Respondent has failed to
register with the Statewide Grievance Committee since February 5, 2003, as
required by Practice Book §2-27(d).
This
reviewing committee finds the following violations of the Rules of Professional
Conduct and the Practice Book by clear and convincing evidence:
This
reviewing committee concludes that the Respondent abandoned the Complainant and
his lawsuit, resulting in judgment entering for the defendant, which clearly violated
Rule 1.3 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
The Respondent's abandonment of his client occurred in or around June of
1997 and thereafter the Respondent ceased communicating with the Complainant
entirely, in violation of Rule 1.4(a) and (b) of the Rules of Professional
Conduct. The Respondent's refusal to
return the Complaint's file to which the Complainant was entitled, despite
numerous requests from the Complainant and Attorney Leff, was in violation of Rule
1.16(d) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
We further conclude that the Respondent's failure to answer the
grievance complaint was in violation of Practice Book §2-32(a)(1).
This
reviewing committee cannot conclude from the record before us that the
Respondent's conduct in this instance violated Rule 1.1 of the Rules of
Professional Conduct. Although it is
clear the Respondent's representation of the Complainant was exceptionally
deficient, it is not clear that it was the result of the incompetence of the
Respondent. However, we conclude that
the Respondent's misconduct was serious and, accordingly, we order the
Respondent presented to the Superior Court for the imposition of whatever
discipline the Court deems appropriate.
__________________________________
Attorney
M. Katherine Webster-O'Keefe
____________________________________
Attorney
Frederick W. Krug
____________________________________
Mr.
William J. Carroll