Case ID: ri_120/html/0978-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

M. P. No. 78-121.
    Frank A. Carter, Disciplinary Counsel, v. Stephen R. Walsh.
   On Friday, April 7, 1968, the respondent, a member of the Bar of this state, appeared before us to show cause why he should not be disciplined because of his failure to file a response with this Court’s Disciplinary Board to a complaint filed with the Board on February 17, 1977. The records of the Board’s counsel indicate that on February 25, 1977, a copy of the complaint was forwarded to the respondent together with a request that he respond to the complaint. Two additional requests for a response, one made in March and the other made in May, went unanswered.

During his appearance before us, the respondent acknowledged his failure to respond but presented us with a document entitled “Respondent’s Answer,” which was filed with the Board in early November 1977, after the Board had instituted formal disciplinary proceedings against the respondent based solely on his failure to comply with the counsel’s request for a response. “Respondent’s Answer” is in the nature of a pleading document and does not constitute a response to the complaint. A response to a complaint filed with the Board should include a statement of facts which may be examined by the Board’s counsel so that counsel can adequately discharge his duties set forth in our Rule 42-5 by either recommending to the Board dismissal of the complaint or the prosecution of formal charges. The respondent’s continued disregard of counsel’s requests for a response is inexcusable and calls for the imposition of discipline.

Accordingly, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that Stephen R. Walsh is hereby reprimanded for indulging in the practices described herein, and he is to forthwith file a response in which he will set out the facts that will assist the counsel and the Board in discharging their duties under the rules. Failure on the respondent’s part to file the report will result in an order being entered, without any further notice, indefinitely suspending him from the practice of law.