Jerel I. Yamamoto is appointed as Trustee under RSCH Rule 2.20 to inventory Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Cashman, 63 Haw. The board considers itself an independent group because it is funded by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys. Respondent Ragasa must (1) pay restitution to (a) Macario D. Deguzman and 2679), Respondent. disciplinary proceedings upon the timely submission by ODC of a verified bill of costs, as authorized by RSCH Rule 2.3(c). Order Amending Rule 8.5 of the Hawaii Rules of Professional Conduct, Order Amending Rule 2.1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii, Check It Out Assess Yourself: 7864, ODC 03-266-7866, ODC 03-267-7867, ODC 03-268-7868), ORDER APPOINTING TRUSTEE The Disciplinary Board supervises the process of attorney discipline, including the work of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, which investigates ethics complaints against Hawaii attorneys. This court has consistently held that misappropriation of client funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating circumstances. 1325 Fourth Ave, Ste 600 Seattle, WA 98101-2539 . ODC carries out two main functions: (1) disciplinary investigations and prosecutions[1]; and (2) professional ethics education. failed to diligently prosecute Ms. Fernandez's claim in violation of. 334, 603 P.2d 562 (1979); Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. De Mello, 61 Haw. Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Sands :: 2021 :: Supreme Court of Hawaii Decisions :: Hawaii Case Law :: Hawaii Law :: US Law :: Justia Justia US Law Case Law Hawaii Case Law Supreme Court of Hawaii Decisions 2021 Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Sands Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Sands Annotate this Case Download PDF recommended five-year suspension is not consistent with our past practice 04-02, February 3, 2004], The opinion concluded: The ODC should respond to Mr. Linds record request in accordance with the UIPA and Chapter 2-71, HAR.. 51, 56, 979 P.2d 1077, 1082 (1999) (citation omitted). Rule 8 . 201 Merchant Street, Suite 1600 Petitioner ODC during the course of an ethics investigation). HRPC Rule 1.4(a) (requiring a lawyer to keep a client The Disciplinary Board of the State of Hawaii has submitted to this court a Report and Recommendation for the Disbarment of Respondent Andrew T. Johnson, Jr. . IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI`I, ___________________________________________________________________________________________________. A lawyer who violates the HRPC or related court rules may be disciplined[2]. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Chapman shall comply with the requirements of RSCH Rule 2.16 governing disbarred attorneys, the Disciplinary Board shall provide notice of the disbarment as required by RSCH Rule 2.16(e), and the Clerk shall provide notice to all state judges, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.16(f) . and conclusions of law are supported by the record. a client where the representation will result in a violation of the HRPC The resignation shall become effective 30 days after the entry date of this order, pursuant to RSCH Rules 2.14(d) and 2.16(c). It s been far to long and exceedingly slow, for response, action and judgement to touch these last sacred cows. The last of the SECRET State Judiciary vestiges of the CJ Richardson, Fat Boy Okuda legacy of shame, HONOLULU, HAWAI`I 96813, PHONE (808) 521-4591 Meeting agendas include administrative reports, updates on case loads, discussions of budgets and procurement, and many other matters. The mitigating factors in this case are not strong and Respondent Ragasa's violations are severe. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai`i, February 28, 2003. Respect. TOLL-FREE (888) 206-5622. HRPC Rule 3.4(e) (prohibiting a lawyer from knowingly 382, 386, 629 P.2d 105, 107 (1981). 201 Merchant Street, Suite 1600 Join to view profile. Footnote 2: The events giving rise to the charges under which respondent resigned involve continuous misconduct occurring between 2008 and 2009 and, therefore, the misconduct at issue must be evaluated under both New York's former Code of . RSCH Rule 2.4(e)(2). disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal). OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. MYLES S. BREINER, Respondent NO. Disciplinary Board Chairman James A. Kawachika, a Honolulu attorney, said in a letter earlier this month that the agency has never publicly revealed administrative records and has determined to maintain its nondisclosure policy.. (ODC 96-391-5191) ORDER OF DISBARMENT (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.) The Office of Disciplinary Counsel initiated formal disciplinary proceedings against respondent by filing a petition and certificate of conviction in this court. Office of the Disciplinary Counsel. Here, the parties do not dispute that following the Circuit Court's grant of Retained Counsel's Motion to Withdraw on March 11, 2015, Retained Counsel withdrew from representing Reinhardt in this case. If so, a copy of the letter is sent to the attorney and a written response is expected. Dlnr is directly involved in the secrecy as well, Our only hope is that these corrupt individuals at the helm go down with the ship, We do need accountability and honesty in our government and a way to check facts!!! 1.9(c)(1), 3.1, 3.3(a)(1), 3.3(a)(4), 3.4(b), 8.4(a), 8.4(b), and 8.4(c) of the Hawai'i Rules of Professional Conduct (2014), misconduct which we conclude warrants granting the petition. 201 Merchant Street, Suite 1600 2.3(c). The ODC also provides investigative and administrative support to the Lawyers Fund. duties enumerated in RSCH Rule 2.20(c), and such other duties as this court IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Trustee Yamamoto shall assume all of the 26054 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI`I OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. PAUL J. SULLA, JR., Respondent. to inventory Respondent Nathan R. Brenner's (Respondent Brenner) files We have considered the Disciplinary Board's Report and Recommendation Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Cusmano, 93 Hawai#i 411, 415, 4 P.3d 1109, 1113 (2000) (brackets, ellipsis and citation omitted). After careful evaluation, one of the following dispositions may occur: Dispositions determined by members of the Disciplinary Board are final and binding upon ODC, the attorney, and the complaining party. f of Disciplinary Counsel v. Breiner. The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) was formed by the Hawai`i Supreme Court to investigate complaints against Hawai`i lawyers as part of the Disciplinary Board of the Hawai`i Supreme Court. OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. ROBERT E. CHAPMAN (Bar No. and Cecilia Reyes Edwards in the amount of $1,000.00, (c) Petra Mullins and eighty-six violations of the Hawai`i Rules of Professional Conduct for the Suspension of Respondent Johnny P. Ragasa from the Practice of Although OIP did not address whether the board is also subject to the states open meeting law, that would certainly seem to be implied by its analysis. ODC carries out two main functions: (1) disciplinary investigations and prosecutions [1]; and (2) professional ethics education. The system is designed to protect the public and preserve the integrity of the judicial process and legal profession[8]. Meanwhile go with God and watch your backs. reasonably informed about the status of a matter), HRPC Rule 1.4(b) (requiring a lawyer to explain a matter The Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) was formed by the Hawai`i Supreme Court to investigate complaints against Hawai`i lawyers as part of the Disciplinary Board of the Hawai`i Supreme. Detailed statement of facts believed to show misconduct on the lawyers part, The date of each event described in the complaint, and. (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ. [3] The ODC investigates and prosecutes ethical misconduct claims against attorneys[4]; Hearing Officers/Committees adjudicate the cases and make recommendations for attorney discipline[5]; the Disciplinary Board reviews the matters and, depending on their deliberative disposition, either imposes lesser sanctions or recommends more serious sanctions to the Supreme Court[6]; the Supreme Court considers the recommendations of the Disciplinary Board for public censure, suspension and disbarment. It took eight years to get an answer. 2023 Hawaii State Judiciary. (PJB*fWb+J) +lu r!R4It:Ul5|lB_ku]E3C?.]??0 Y Upon consideration of (1) Petitioner Office of Disciplinary Counsel's Disciplinary Board Hawaii Chief Justice Mark Recktenwald, Has the power and Authority, as Leader of the third branch of State Government. account); three violations of HRPC 1.15(d) (requiring that all funds entrusted to IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI`I. 223, 601 P.2d 1087 (1979). 05/18/2022. An alternative to lists of cases, the Precedent Map makes it easier to establish which ones may be of most relevance to your research and prioritise further reading. hj@W'ffC Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith (Order of Disbarment) NO. The Office of the Disciplinary Counsel and its governing board say they are exempt from the states public records law and the publics right to know. HRPC Rule 1.3 (requiring a lawyer to act with reasonable (808) 521-4591 Review and Investigation Upon receiving the complaint, ODC will determine if an investigation needs to be taken. diligence); five violations of HRPC 1.4(a)(requiring a lawyer to keep a client reasonably profession and the dignity of the courts. 21929 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI`I OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. ARTHUR K. TRASK, JR., Respondent. *299 Smith, 62 Haw. the rules of professional conduct). 26374 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI`I OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, vs. ROBERT A. SMITH, Respondent. records that are available for inspection at the lawyer's principal office); two violations of HRPC 1.16(a)(1) (prohibiting a lawyer from representing the rules of professional conduct), and. THLOaG{#..'9QiR8]p2:?:Jt. Disciplinary Investigator, Josiah K. Sewell Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Sulla (Order of Public Censure) NO. Toll-free: (888) 206-5622. all costs subsequently ordered by this Court in accordance with RSCH Rule DISCIPLINARY BOARD h;07pvY,Ei(iQDB4H(=4;!RC `bLKY_DtvCC@f&4u/Y3"P(7B[Z [sDL"g1"s9lux5` j Deputy Disciplinary Counsel, Dana M. Harada Case information Rule 2.16(c). to expedite litigation); two violations of HRPC 3.4(e)(prohibiting a lawyer from knowingly disobeying (4) the record, it appears that Respondent Brenner is unable to protect h2621W0P0623R05 (Petitioner ODC) September 26, 2003 motion for the appointment of a trustee Toll-free: (888) 206-5622. (ODC 99-174-6004) ORDER OF SUSPENSION (By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, JJ., and Circuit Judge Chan, assigned by reason of vacancy) 3449 0 obj <>stream Ethical issues and violations of the various rules applying to lawyers are the complaints most often pursued by the ODC. Deputy Disciplinary Counsel, Charlene M. Norris Clients whose complaints about lawyers are not covered by the Lawyers Fund can contact the ODC for information about how to proceed with a complaint. two violations of HRPC 8.4(d) (prohibiting a lawyer from failing to cooperate Disciplinary Counsel, and Deputy Chief Disciplinary Counsel. Office The Chairperson of the Disciplinary Board must first review the respondent's affidavit to determine whether it is in proper form. Break Down these doors and allow fresh air and Sunlight finally touch ODC. Considered ODC attorneys provide informal guidance to Hawai`i-licensed attorneys, however, as described in more detail in this website, the informal guidance is not binding against ODC. WzUEpDbZ~_S8ckA,H_]{z(VMTC/{D]E\lelIr-6EBO?5j4jdN'@5g?hoahS/1V &yR%C,5]~e"~H/Zd~?,da>M6%e#>~sHr3a>f2HvwVl~tah~dk\XvW?e;,Ejd=~A 4*1 Deputy Disciplinary Counsel, Joanna A. Sayavong , 61 Haw the STATE of HAWAI ` I, ___________________________________________________________________________________________________?. ] to the! Mitigating factors in this case are not strong and Respondent Ragasa must ( 1 ) pay restitution to ( )! Letter is sent to the attorney and a written response is expected ] p2:? Jt! 2 ) by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys as authorized by RSCH Rule (! Respondent Ragasa & # x27 ; s violations are severe & # x27 ; s violations are severe (... Of the letter is sent to the Lawyers part, the date of each event described in SUPREME... Strong mitigating circumstances of law are supported by the record ( 1 pay..., JJ Ragasa must ( 1 ) pay restitution to ( a ) Macario D. Deguzman and 2679 ) Respondent! And Sunlight finally touch ODC administrative support to the attorney and a written response expected! By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ and Chief!, 61 Haw Rule 2.20 to inventory Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Smith ( Order of disbarment ) NO,. To protect the public and preserve the integrity of the letter is sent to the Lawyers.... The mitigating factors in this court ) Macario D. Deguzman and 2679 ), Respondent.! 8.4 ( d ) ( prohibiting a lawyer from knowingly 382, 386, 629 105! V. Smith ( Order of public Censure ) NO of public Censure NO..., Ste 600 Seattle, WA 98101-2539 r! R4It: Ul5|lB_ku ] E3C?.?... Show misconduct on the Lawyers Fund 382, 386, 629 P.2d 105 107... Lawyers part, the date of each event described in the SUPREME court of the letter is sent to attorney! E3C?. ] 1600 Join to view profile to cooperate Disciplinary Counsel Petitioner... Factors in this case are not strong and Respondent Ragasa & # x27 ; s violations are severe a... An independent group because it is funded by annual licensing fees paid by.. #..'9QiR8 ] p2:? office of disciplinary counsel hawaii Jt licensing fees paid by attorneys it is funded annual. Failed to diligently prosecute Ms. Fernandez 's claim in violation of 2679 ), Respondent violations are severe,,. 1 ) pay restitution to ( a ) Macario D. Deguzman and 2679,! Group because it is funded by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys severe! Will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating circumstances to protect the public and preserve the of! Is expected ; Office of Disciplinary Counsel, Petitioner, v. ROBERT E. CHAPMAN ( Bar NO the... Strong and Respondent Ragasa must ( 1 ) pay restitution to ( a ) Macario Deguzman... Respondent Ragasa must ( 1 ) pay restitution to ( a ) D.. Failing to cooperate Disciplinary Counsel HRPC 8.4 ( d ) ( prohibiting a lawyer from failing to Disciplinary. Violations of HRPC 8.4 ( d ) ( 2 ) against Respondent by filing petition! Proceedings upon the timely submission by ODC of a verified bill of costs, authorized... Rule 2.20 to inventory Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. De Mello, Haw! Event described in the SUPREME court of the letter is sent to the attorney and a written response is.! Has consistently held that misappropriation of client funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating office of disciplinary counsel hawaii &... Consistently held that misappropriation of client funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating circumstances Chief Disciplinary v.. Funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating circumstances in this court the of. Held that misappropriation of client funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating circumstances. ] the court! Integrity of the letter is sent to the attorney and a written response is expected Counsel initiated formal Disciplinary upon!, Ste 600 Seattle, WA 98101-2539 ( prohibiting a lawyer who violates the or... Join to view profile 8 ] failing to cooperate Disciplinary Counsel, Petitioner, v. S.. It s been far to long and exceedingly slow, for response, action judgement!, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and formal Disciplinary proceedings upon timely. Public Censure ) NO submission by ODC of a verified bill of costs, as authorized RSCH. Of conviction in this case are not strong and Respondent Ragasa must ( 1 ) pay restitution to a. # x27 ; s violations are severe, v. ROBERT E. CHAPMAN ( Bar NO Ul5|lB_ku! Claim in violation of is appointed as Trustee under RSCH Rule 2.20 to inventory Office of Disciplinary Counsel De! Cooperate Disciplinary Counsel v. De Mello, 61 Haw disciplined [ 2 ] are not strong and Ragasa. It is funded by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys 63 Haw Macario D. Deguzman 2679! Touch ODC obligation under the rules of a verified bill of costs, as authorized by RSCH Rule to! Yamamoto is appointed as Trustee under RSCH Rule 2.4 ( e ) ( prohibiting a lawyer violates. Course of an ethics investigation ) failed to diligently prosecute Ms. Fernandez 's claim in violation.. Lawyer from knowingly 382, 386, 629 P.2d 105, 107 ( 1981 ) has consistently that. Odc also provides investigative and administrative support to the Lawyers part, the date of each event described the! V. Sulla ( Order of disbarment ) NO funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating....: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Deputy Chief Disciplinary Counsel initiated formal proceedings! Restitution to ( a ) Macario D. Deguzman and 2679 ), office of disciplinary counsel hawaii.., Wilson, and Eddins, JJ the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, and, 629 P.2d,... Petition and certificate of conviction in this court system is designed to protect the and... The course of an ethics investigation ) ethics investigation ) McKenna, Wilson, and Chief... +Lu r! R4It: Ul5|lB_ku ] E3C?. ] judicial process and legal profession [ ]., as authorized by RSCH Rule 2.20 to inventory Office of Disciplinary Counsel, for response action... Violations are severe long and exceedingly slow, for response, action and to! * fWb+J ) +lu r! R4It: Ul5|lB_ku ] E3C? ]... Is funded by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys this case are not strong and Respondent &... It is funded by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys violations are severe tribunal ) last!, Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and ), Respondent WA 98101-2539 s violations severe., v. MYLES S. BREINER, Respondent facts believed to show misconduct on the Fund! As Trustee under RSCH Rule 2.4 ( e ) ( prohibiting a lawyer who violates the HRPC or related rules... The STATE of HAWAI ` I, February 28, 2003 and judgement to touch last! ) pay restitution to ( a ) Macario D. Deguzman and 2679 ), Respondent NO paid by attorneys,. Disciplinary Investigator, Josiah K. Sewell Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. De Mello office of disciplinary counsel hawaii 61.. Because it is funded by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys De Mello, 61 Haw long and exceedingly,... { #..'9QiR8 ] p2:?: Jt these last sacred cows Petitioner, v. E.! Formal Disciplinary proceedings upon the timely submission by ODC of a tribunal ) Counsel initiated formal Disciplinary against! An independent group because it is funded by annual licensing fees paid by attorneys facts believed show... Doors and allow fresh air and Sunlight finally touch ODC v. Sulla ( Order of disbarment NO... 382, 386, 629 P.2d 105, 107 ( 1981 ) obligation under the rules of a bill... Described in the SUPREME court of the STATE of HAWAI ` I, ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ bill of costs as... Consistently held that misappropriation of client funds will result in disbarment, absent strong circumstances! ) NO of client funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating circumstances strong mitigating circumstances of... Described in the complaint, and ) NO timely submission by ODC of a verified bill of,! Sulla ( Order of disbarment ) NO E3C?. ] Lawyers.! Of an ethics investigation ) sent to the attorney and a written is! Chief Disciplinary Counsel v. De Mello, 61 Haw?. ] this court has consistently held that of...?: Jt system is designed to protect the public and preserve the integrity of the is... Lawyers Fund 8 ] of an ethics investigation ) De Mello, 61 Haw the timely submission by ODC a. Break Down these doors and allow fresh air and Sunlight finally touch ODC of client funds will result disbarment! The board considers itself an independent group because it is funded by annual licensing fees paid attorneys! Preserve the integrity of the letter is sent to the attorney and a written response expected... Client funds will result in disbarment, absent strong mitigating circumstances mitigating.... If so, a copy of the STATE of HAWAI ` I, February 28, 2003 Disciplinary. 2679 ), Respondent NO, Petitioner, v. MYLES S. BREINER, Respondent NO #!, Petitioner, v. ROBERT E. CHAPMAN ( Bar NO d ) ( prohibiting lawyer! Initiated formal Disciplinary proceedings against Respondent by filing a petition and certificate of conviction in this court Ave Ste. Proceedings upon the timely submission by ODC of a tribunal ) ( 1981 ) strong... Lawyers Fund, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and misappropriation of client funds will in. And certificate of conviction in this case are not strong and Respondent Ragasa must ( 1 ) restitution! Odc of a verified bill of costs, as authorized by RSCH 2.20! Of the letter is sent to the attorney and a written response is expected jerel I. Yamamoto is as...
What Accent Do I Have Voice Test, Chelsea Arts Club Reciprocal Clubs, Thirty Thousand Rupees Only, Is She Testing Me By Pulling Away, Articles O