Preview:

06/20/2008 "See News Release 041 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents." SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO. 08-B-0616 IN RE: KATHERINE WHEELER

ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

PER CURIAM
This disciplinary matter arises from formal charges filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") against respondent, Katherine Wheeler, an attorney licensed to practice law in Louisiana.

UNDERLYING FACTS In January 2001, Key Home Health Care hired respondent to negotiate a reduction in the payments it was making in reimbursements to Medicare. Key Home Health Care paid respondent a $5,000 advanced fee.1 Although respondent worked on the matter, she never obtained the reduction. In December 2002, through its new attorney Sherry Powell Crain, Key Home Health Care informed respondent that her services were no longer needed as it no longer wished to have the Medicare reimbursement payments reduced. Ms. Crain also requested an accounting on behalf of her client. Respondent did not provide an accounting but did inform Ms. Crain that she was mailing an $1,800 refund of the advanced fee to Key Home Health Care. This refund was never received.

At the time, respondent was employed with the law firm of Steffes & Macmurdo, which billed Key Home Health Care $610.50. When respondent left Steffes & Macmurdo in April 2001, she took the Key Home Health Care file with her. Steffes & Macmurdo forwarded to her $4,389.50, which represented the remainder of Key Home Health Care's advanced fee.

1

In July 2003, Ms. Crain filed a disciplinary complaint against respondent with the ODC. Respondent failed to respond to the complaint in writing and failed to provide the ODC with promised documents.

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS In July 2005, the ODC filed one count of formal charges against respondent, alleging that her conduct as set forth above violated Rules 1.4 (failure to communicate with a client), 1.5(f)(3) (failure to provide an accounting), 1.5(f)(5) (failure to refund an unearned fee), 1.15(a)(c) (safekeeping property of clients or third persons), 1.16(d) (obligations upon termination of the representation), 8.1(c) (failure to cooperate with the ODC in its investigation), 8.4(b) (commission of a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer), and 8.4(c) (engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation) of the Rules of Professional Conduct. Respondent was served with the formal charges but initially failed to answer. Accordingly, the factual allegations contained therein were deemed admitted and proven by clear and convincing evidence pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX,

Download 2008-B-0616 IN RE: KATHERINE WHEELER.pdf

Louisiana Law