Utah Bar Journal

In summary:
Ms. Webb was associated with a business that engaged in direct mailings to the public to identify people who were interested in
estate planning. After the business identified people non-lawyer agents would visit the potential customers. During the initial visit, the non-lawyer agents gave a presentation about the benefits and would recommend living trusts to potential clients. The non-lawyer agents also provided a brochure with Ms. Webb’s name and phone number on it. If the potential client was interested, the non-lawyer agent presented an engagement letter drafted by Ms. Webb. The non-lawyer agent then forwarded the signed engagement letter and the client’s information to Ms. Webb. The engagement letter did not disclose Ms. Webb’s nature or terms of her relationship with the business. Ms. Webb would prepare estate planning documents. Ms. Webb would receive part of the money paid and turn over the majority of the money paid to the business. The non-lawyer agents would then present the estate documents to clients for signature. Ms. Webb knew that the non-lawyer agents would attempt to sell insurance products to her clients and that they received a commission for this.

ADMONITION
On April 5, 2007, 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 Rules 8.1(b) (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), 8.4(c) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
An attorney borrowed money in the form of a cash advance on a credit card charge account. The attorney misrepresented the transaction to the bank and credit company by labeling the charge as legal fees. The attorney’s response to the Informal Complaint was not in compliance with the Rule 8.1(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

ADMONITION
On March 28, 2007, 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 1.8(h) (Conflict of Interest: Current Clients), 8.4(d) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
An attorney entered into an agreement with an indigent client whereby the client waived all rights to file a Bar complaint and released the attorney from all other claims. Prior to the client signing the agreement, the attorney did not advise the client to seek independent counsel. The agreement interferes with attorney discipline oversight and undermines the integrity of the profession.

PROBATION
On November 27, 2006, the Honorable Joseph C. Fratto, Third Judicial District Court, entered Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order Sealing File against an attorney. The attorney was placed on a six-month probation and anger management counseling. Upon the successful completion of the probation and counseling, the action was dismissed with prejudice.

In summary:
An attorney engaged in inappropriate behavior and anger in an incident involving parking lot security guards.