Attorneys – Discipline – Definite Suspension – Lack of Competence – Communication Failures – Bankruptcy Clients

In several matters before the bankruptcy court, the respondent-attorney’s representation of his clients was so inaccurate, incomplete, or dilatory that he was required to refund or disgorge his legal fees. Respondent also failed to timely communicate with the bankruptcy trustee, his clients, and the Office of Disciplinary Counsel. Respondent admits that by his conduct he has violated several provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct: Rule 1.1 (competence), Rule 1.2 (scope of representation), Rule 1.3 (diligence), Rule 1.4 (communication), Rule 1.15(a) (safekeeping client property), Rule 1.15(c) (keeping of unearned legal fees in trust account), Rule 3.4(c) (disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal), Rule 8.1(b) (failing to respond to a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority), Rule 8.4(a) (violating the Rules of Professional Conduct), and Rule 8.4(e) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice).

We accept the agreement for discipline by consent and suspend respondent for a period of one year, retroactive to his earlier interim suspension.

In re Davis (Lawyers Weekly No. 010-008-19, 5 pp.) (Per curiam) John Nichols and Ericka Williams for the ODC; Jonathan Davis, pro se. S.C. S. Ct.