Preview:

03/15/02 "See News Release 020 for any concurrences and/or dissents."

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO. 01-B-1419

IN RE: ROBERT E. PATRICK

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM
This disciplinary proceeding arises from formal charges filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") against respondent, Robert E. Patrick.

PRIOR DISCIPLINARY HISTORY On July 9, 1999, we disbarred respondent from the practice of law for conduct unrelated to the instant proceeding. In re: Patrick, 99-0771 (La. 7/2/99), 738 So. 2d 539. Respondent's misconduct in that case included commingling and conversion of client funds and submission of false evidence in an attempt to cover up his wrongdoing. In addition to respondent's 1999 disbarment, we previously imposed a deferred ninety day suspension on respondent for providing inaccurate information to clients and courts in two criminal matters. In re: Patrick, 95-1621 (La. 9/15/95), 660 So. 2d 433. The disciplinary board has admonished respondent on two prior occasions. In 1995, the disciplinary board admonished respondent for incompetence, failure to communicate and assessing an improper fee. In 1991, the board admonished him for improper use of a client trust account.

UNDERLYING FACTS Count I In September 1996, Quincy M. Edwards retained respondent to represent him in a personal injury case against State Farm Insurance Company. Shortly thereafter, respondent settled the matter on behalf of his client. On October 7, 1996, State Farm issued a settlement check in the amount of $10,000, made payable to respondent, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Edwards' previous attorney in the matter, Eldon Guillory. Subsequently, respondent signed Mr. Guillory's name to the check, without Mr. Guillory's knowledge or consent, and negotiated it. Respondent kept the entirety of the proceeds, and never notified Mr. Guillory of the settlement nor attempted to negotiate a division of fees with him.

Count II In connection with the Edwards litigation (which is the subject of Count I), Mr. Edwards had incurred medical bills in the amount of $3,400 for treatment provided to him by the England-Masse Chiropractic Clinic ("England-Masse"). Respondent was put on notice that England-Masse maintained a privilege or lien on the settlement proceeds. However, after the settlement was perfected, respondent converted these funds to his own use. England-Masse sent numerous requests for payment to respondent, but respondent failed or refused to remit the funds. As a result, EnglandMasse filed suit against respondent to obtain a monetary judgment for the amount of the lien.

Count III

2

In late 1998, Keatha Poullard retained respondent to represent her in a personal injury matter. Subsequently, respondent settled the case for $3,200. He forged Ms. Poullard's name to the settlement check and negotiated it, without her knowledge and consent. When the third party health care providers demanded payment from Ms. Poullard, respondent advised her to tell them her treating physicians had agreed to "write off the bill," which respondent knew was false. Moreover, respondent did not provide his client with the correct portion of her interest in the settlement, and did not provide his client with an accounting or disbursement sheet.1 Subsequently, Ms. Poullard filed suit against respondent. The court determined respondent had converted her funds.

Count IV On October 31, 1997, Creighton M. Moss, an inmate, retained respondent for the purpose of obtaining a transfer to another correctional facility. Mr. Moss paid respondent the sum of $10,000. Subsequently, respondent performed little or no services on behalf of Mr. Moss and refused to communicate with him regarding the status of the legal matter. Respondent failed to provide an accounting, return his client's file or refund the unearned portion of the fee, despite repeated requests.

Count V On January 22, 1998, David and Teresa Joshlin retained respondent to represent them in connection with an injury that their son had suffered at school on May 19, 1997. Aware the prescriptive date was approaching, Mrs. Joshlin repeatedly called

Initially, respondent paid Ms. Poullard $300 as her portion of proceeds from the settlement. Later, when she went to his office to find out why her medical expenses had not been satisfied, respondent issued her a $215.06 personal check with the condition that she promise to testify on his behalf in the event her medical provider sued him. 3

1

respondent during the months of March, April and May of 1998. Respondent failed to return her calls.

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS Interim Suspension After receiving complaints against respondent, the ODC filed a motion in this court seeking to place respondent on immediate interim suspension for threat of harm pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX,

Download 2001-B-1419 IN RE: ROBERT E. PATRICK.pdf

Louisiana Law