STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE

 

Susan C. Andrews, Complainant vs. Douglas R. Daniels, Respondent

 

Grievance Complaint #02-1252

 

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, 1 Court Street, Middletown, Connecticut on March 11, 2004.   The hearing addressed the record of the complaint filed on June 23, 2003, and the probable cause determination filed by the New Haven Judicial District Grievance Panel for the towns of Bethany, New Haven and Woodbridge on December 30, 2003 finding that there existed probable cause that the Respondent violated Rule 8.4(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Practice Book §2-32(a)(1).

 

Notice of the hearing was mailed to the Complainant and to the Respondent on February 26, 2004.  On March 15, 2004 the Respondent’s hearing notice was returned to the Statewide Grievance Committee marked, “return to sender, not deliverable as addressed, unable to forward.” The hearing notice had been mailed to the Respondent at his last registered address, 234 Church Street, New Haven, CT 06510. On March 16, 2004 the hearing notice was re-mailed to the Respondent at 526 Main Street, West Haven, CT 06516-4266, an address believed to be a forwarding address for the Respondent’s mail.  The Complainant appeared at the hearing and testified. The Respondent did not appear at the hearing.

 

Mr. George Sawyer, a member of this reviewing committee, was not present for this hearing.  The Complainant waived the participation of  Mr. Sawyer in this decision.  Accordingly, this decision was rendered by the undersigned.

 

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

 

The Respondent represented the Complainant in her dissolution of marriage action.  The Complainant paid the Respondent $13,500, of which $7,500 dollars was to be held in trust for the Complainant by the Respondent.  On April 1, 2002, the Respondent sent the Complainant a bill for an additional $1,004.60.  The Complainant was not able to contact the Respondent and did not receive any trust funds back from the Respondent.  The Respondent’s copy of the grievance complaint, sent certified mail, was returned to the Statewide Grievance Committee, marked “refused.”  The Respondent did not file an answer to this grievance complaint.  The Respondent has failed to keep the Statewide Grievance Committee informed of his address as required by Practice Book § 2-27(d).

 

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

           

By taking $7,500 from the Complainant to be held in trust, and not returning any of those funds to the Complainant, the Respondent engaged in conduct involving fraud, dishonesty, misrepresentation and/or deceit in violation of Rule 8.4(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. By failing to file an answer to this grievance complaint, without good cause, the Respondent has violated Practice Book §2-32(a)(1).  Having found by clear and convincing evidence that the Respondent violated Rule 8.4(3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct and Practice Book §2-32(a)(1), we order that the Respondent be presented to the Superior Court for the imposition of whatever discipline the Court deems appropriate.

 

____________________________________

Attorney Lorraine D. Eckert 

 

____________________________________

Attorney Carl Fortuna, Jr.