Utah Bar Journal

In summary:
An attorney failed to deposit clients funds in an attorney trust account thereby commingling personal funds with client funds. The attorney’s fee agreement provided that in order for the attorney to represent clients, the clients were required to waive the attorney’s duty to act as a fiduciary with regard to the attorney’s trust account.

ADMONITION
On July 11, 2007, 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 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(b) (Communication), 3.4(d) (Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
In divorce proceedings, an attorney failed to protect the client’s interests by failing to advise the client that the attorney would be out of the country for an extended period of time and failing to get another attorney to cover a hearing while the attorney was out of the country. The attorney also failed to communicate with opposing counsel, including not sending critical information to opposing counsel and not producing documents after the attorney committed to do so.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND
On July 5, 2007, the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court entered an Order of Discipline: Public Reprimand against Larry K. Yazzie for violation of Rules 1.4(b) (Communication), 1.5(a) (Fees), 7.1(a) (Communications Concerning a Lawyer’s Services), 7.4 (Communication of Fields of Practice), 7.5(a) (Firm Names and Letterheads), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
Mr. Yazzie represented a client in a criminal matter and the client’s son in a personal injury matter. The clients’ cases were in another state’s jurisdiction. Mr. Yazzie is not licensed in the other state. Mr. Yazzie failed to communicate his status to his client. Mr. Yazzie charged for work that he was not able to complete because he was not a licensed attorney of that state. Mr. Yazzie had misleading letterhead and advertising, including holding himself out to be a specialist in personal injury matters.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND
On June 25, 2007, the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court entered an Order of Discipline: Public Reprimand against Denney S. Berrett for violation of Rules 1.2(a) (Scope of Representation), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(a) (Communication), 1.4(b) (Communication), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
Mr. Berrett failed to inform one client about a settlement offer. Without the client’s consent, Mr. Berrett settled the case and failed to inform the client of the settlement. In another client’s case, Mr. Berrett failed to file an opposition to a motion for summary judgment. Thereafter, Mr. Berrett failed to take any steps to cure the missed deadline, which resulted in the client’s case being dismissed with prejudice.

PUBLIC REPRIMAND
On May 25, 2007, the Chair of the Ethics and Discipline Committee of the Utah Supreme Court entered an Order of Discipline: Public Reprimand against Denney S. Berrett for violation of Rules 8.4(c) (Misconduct), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
Mr. Berrett misrepresented the status of the case to a client’s daughter, who was acting on behalf of the client. His misrepresentation included the identification of defendants and the type and amount of work he had performed on the case.

ADMONITION
On June 25, 2007, 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), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(b) (Communication), 1.4(b) (Communication), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating Representation), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
In divorce proceedings, an attorney failed to ascertain where the proceedings were filed, and failed to answer the complaint and appear on behalf of the client. The attorney failed to keep the client reasonably informed after the default was set aside. The occasional phone calls and 2 or 3 e-mails in over a year were not reasonable communications when the matter required immediate action and diligence on the part of the attorney. The attorney failed to adequately communicate with the client to allow the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation. The attorney failed to act with reasonable diligence at the beginning of the representation and also after the default judgment was set aside. The attorney failed to take action, failed to protect the client’s interests, failed to act, and failed to complete the matter.

SUSPENSION
On June 20, 2007, the Honorable Ernie W. Jones, Second Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Discipline: One Year Suspension against Thomas A. Blakely for violation of a previous disciplinary order.

In summary:
The Court entered an Order of Discipline: Public Reprimand and Probation on April 27, 2006, placing Mr. Blakely on a one-year probation with certain conditions. Mr. Blakely failed to comply with the terms of his probation and the Office of Professional Conduct initiated an Order to Show Cause proceeding. Based upon Mr. Blakey’s failure to comply with the terms of his probation, the Court suspended Mr. Blakely from practicing law for one year.

ADMONITION
On April 9, 2007, the Honorable Joseph C. Fratto, Third Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Discipline: Admonition against an attorney for violation of Rules 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4(a) (Communication), 1.16(d) (Declining or Terminating Representation), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

In summary:
The attorney was hired to pursue a malpractice action. The attorney filed a complaint to initiate the action. Nearly a year and a half after the action was filed, it was dismissed for failure to prosecute. A month after it was dismissed, and prior to the statute of limitations running, the attorney filed another action on behalf of the client. Eight months after that action was filed, it was dismissed for failure to file a summons. During the time of the filings, the client contacted the attorney for status updates. Many times the attorney failed to return the client’s calls. When the client was able to speak with the attorney, the attorney assured the client that the case was proceeding. After the client hired another attorney to review the attorney’s work, the client requested the client file. The client file was returned nine months after the request was made. The attorney initially failed to account and return the unearned portion of the retainer. Thereafter, the client filed a malpractice action against the attorney and judgment was entered against the attorney. The attorney returned the retainer as part of the judgment.