Utah Bar Journal

In summary:
The attorney failed to abide by the client's instruction concerning the timeframe of the case, and failed to diligently pursue the client's case. The attorney failed to communicate with the client, and failed to respond to the client's requests for information. The attorney did not communicate the basis of the fee to the client. The attorney charged an excessive fee in light of the minimal work performed. The attorney failed to respond to the Office of Professional Conduct's Notice of Informal Complaint.

RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE
On July 23, 2006 the Honorable Dennis Fuchs, Third Judicial District Court, entered Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order of Disbarment disbarring Daniel R. Boone from the practice of law for violation of Rules 3.3 (Candor Toward the Tribunal), 4.1 (Truthfulness in Statements to Others), 8.4(c) (Misconduct), and Rule 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
Mr. Boone was disbarred from the practice of law by the United States District Court. Mr. Boone's misconduct included repeatedly filing false statements and absent action taken by United States Trustee's Office prohibiting him from filing applications for installment payment of filing fees, there is no indication this practice would not have continued. Mr. Boone also engaged in the practice of law before the United States District Court while under a suspension order from another disciplinary authority. Boone's continued practice of law is detrimental to the public interest and the administration of justice.

The foregoing misconduct meets the standard for the presumptive sanction of disbarment in Utah, and the Court accordingly entered reciprocal discipline on that basis.

DISBARMENT
On August 18, 2006, the Honorable Fred D. Howard, Fourth Judicial District Court, entered Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order of Disbarment disbarring Trevor L. Zabriskie from the practice of law for violation of Rules 8.4(b) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
Mr. Zabriskie was convicted of endangerment of a child, a third degree felony in violation of Utah Code Annotated section 76-5-112.5, and sexual battery, a class A misdemeanor, in violation of Utah Code Annotated section 76-9-702(3). The charges were later reduced to a class A misdemeanor and a class B misdemeanor, pursuant to a 402(b) reduction. The Court in the disciplinary matter found that Mr. Zabriskie's criminal act reflects adversely on his fitness as a lawyer.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND
On August 17, 2006, the Honorable Eric A. Ludlow, Fifth Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Discipline: Public Reprimand against Ricky D. Bonewell for violation of Rules 1.1 (Competence), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4 (Communication), 1.4(a) (Communication), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating Representation), 8.4(d) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
In one matter, Mr. Bonewell prepared a stipulated agreement for child support on behalf of his client. The client's ex-spouse was not represented by counsel. Both the client and ex-spouse signed the agreement, and the document was filed with the court. Thereafter, the ex-spouse provided additional income verification from the spouse's employer to Mr. Bonewell indicating that the spouse's wages were less than the amount stated in the signed agreement. Based on the income verification and the statutory guidelines, the ex-spouse's child support payment would be reduced. Mr. Bonewell felt obligated to amend the Decree of Divorce. Mr. Bonewell drafted and filed an amended Decree of Divorce without informing or consulting with his client concerning the changes nor did the client approve the amended Decree of Divorce. The client requested that Mr. Bonewell file the necessary paperwork to increase the child support which was due to the client. Mr. Bonewell did not respond to the client's request for three months. Thereafter, Mr. Bonewell indicated to the client that he would need an additional retainer to amend the Decree of Divorce.

In the second matter, Mr. Bonewell was retained to pursue a medical malpractice claim against a chiropractor. During the representation, Mr. Bonewell failed to timely return the client's phone calls. Mr. Bonewell contacted a medical expert who stated that the chiropractor had not breached the standard of care. Sometime after, Mr. Bonewell relayed this information on to his client, indicating that he would not take her case and giving the client referrals to other attorneys. This was approximately a year after the client retained Mr. Bonewell. After the representation terminated, Mr. Bonewell failed to inform the client of the two-year statute of limitation on the claim, or that it would run in seven months.

ADMONITION
On August 17, 2006, the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court entered an Order of Discipline: Admonition against an attorney for violation of Rules 1.1 (Competence), 1.2(a) (Scope of Representation), 1.4(a) (Communication), 8.4(d) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
The attorney represented the client in a litigation matter. The attorney filed a motion to recuse the judge, but proceeded with a hearing in the absence of the opposing party and verbally withdrew the motion. The attorney negligently submitted an incorrect order and failed to take action to rectify the error. The attorney also attempted to settle the case without consulting with the client.

ADMONITION
On August 15, 2006, the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court entered an Order of Discipline: Admonition against an attorney for violations of Rule 1.4(a) (Communication), 1.4(b) (Communication), 1.5(b) (Fees), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
The attorney was hired to represent a client in an immigration matter. The attorney failed to inform the client of the Court's decision concerning the client's case. The attorney failed to communicate with the client to allow the client to make informed decisions. There was no written agreement between the client and attorney for the attorney to speak with the client's spouse concerning the matter in place of the client. The attorney failed to have a written fee agreement to evidence that the attorney communicated the basis and rate of the fee for fees charged over $750.00.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND, PROBATION
On April 27, 2006, the Honorable Ernie W. Jones, Second Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Discipline: Public Reprimand and Probation against Thomas A. Blakely for violation of Rules 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(a) (Communication), 1.5(a) (Fees), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating Representation), 8.4(d) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
Mr. Blakely was hired to represent a client in a bankruptcy, and to draft a will. The client paid for the representation. Mr. Blakely failed to keep the funds separate from his own. Mr. Blakely filed the bankruptcy petition five months after representation commenced. Mr. Blakely failed to appear for the creditor's meeting, and the matter was dismissed. The dismissal order was vacated, but Mr. Blakely failed to appear for the second creditor's meeting. Based on the failure to appear the action was dismissed again. The will was never drafted. Mr. Blakely failed to keep the client reasonably informed about the bankruptcy matter. Mr. Blakely moved, and failed to inform the client. No meaningful work was performed on behalf of the client to justify the amount Mr. Blakely collected from the client. Mr. Blakely abandoned the representation and failed to return the file and unearned fee.