Case Title: The Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee, Wyoming State Bar v. Clyde W. Stock

Citation: 2020 WY 16

Docket Number: d-19-0005

State: wyoming

Court: Wyoming Supreme Court

Date: 2020-02-05T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING
2020 WY 16
October Term, A.D. 2019

February 5, 2020

‘THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE,
OF LAW COMMITTEE, WYOMING
STATE BAR,

Petitioner,
D-19-0005

CLYDE W. STOCK,
Respondent,
ORDER ENJOINING THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW

[$1] This matter came before the Court upon the “Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law
and Recommendations of the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law,” filed
herein December 30, 2019, by the Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee of the
Wyoming State Bar (the Committee). After a careful review of the Committee's
recommendations and the file, this Court finds the Committee’s Recommendations should,
>be approved, confirmed and adopted by the Court, Itis, therefore,

 

[2] ADJUDGED AND ORDERED that the “Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law
‘and Recommendations of the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law,” which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein, shall be, and the same hereby is, approved,
‘confirmed, and adopted by this Court; and it is further

 

 
 

[$3] ADJUDGED AND ORDERED that Respondent Clyde W. Stock is hereby
‘enjoined from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law. Rule 7(4)(1), Rules of
Procedure Governing Unauthorized Practice of Law: and it is further

[$4] ORDERED that on or before June 1, 2020, Respondent Clyde W. Stock shall remit
4 fine of $4,000 to the Wyoming State Bar. Rule 7(d)(), Rules of Procedure Governing,
Unauthorized Practice of Law. If Respondent fails to pay the fine in the time allotted,
‘execution may issue on the fine; and itis further
[f5] ORDERED that on or before June 1, 2020, Respondent Clyde W. Stock shall make
restitution of $4,464 to Dan Carey. Rule 7(dX3), Rules of Procedure Governing
Unauthorized Practice of Law. Respondent shall provide proof of such payment to the
Committee. If Respondent fails to make restitution in the time allotted, execution may
issue on the restitution award; and it is further

[6] ORDERED that on or before June 1, 2020, Respondent Clyde W. Stock shall
reimburse the Committee for costs of this proceeding in the amount $5,877.67, by paying
that amount to the Wyoming State Bar. Rule 7(4)(4), Rules of Procedure Governing
Unauthorized Practice of Law. If Respondent fails to make payment in the time allotted,
execution may issue on the cost award.

 

[97] DATED this $* day of February, 2020.
BY THE COURT:
bs)

MICHAEL K. DAVIS
Chief Justice
 

In Tue Supe couRT
3 a FD

BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT 30

STATE OF WYOMING
aTRICIA| 7
In the matter of )

CLYDE W. STOCK, UPL Nos. 2018-005 and 2018-006

)
)
‘Unauthorized practice of law respondent.)
)

 

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND RECOMMENDATIONS,
OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW

 

THIS MATTER came before the Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law
(*Commitee”) for hearing of Bar Counsel's Petition for Civil Injunction and Other Relief, The
<uly-noticed hearing was held on the 3% day of December, 2019, at the Sweetwater County
Courthouse in Green River, Wyoming. A quorum of the Committee, comprised of Christine
Stickley (Chair), Elizabeth Gegen, Melissa Owens, Michelle Connell, Anna Olson and Grant
Lawson, was present.! Appearing on behalf of the Wyoming State Bar were Mark Gifford, Bar
Counsel, Melinda MeCorkle, Deputy Bar Counsel, and Shannon Howshar, Assistant to Bar
Counsel. Respondent did not appear, a a result the hearing proceeded as a default hearing.

‘The Committee, having heard the testimony of witnesses, having received certain exhi

 

into evidence, having reviewed the pleadings on file inthis matter and being fully informed in the
premises, FINDS, CONCLUDES and RECOMMENDS as follows:
Eid
1, Im late February 2018, Thayne attorney, Kevin Voyles, notified the Wyoming
Office of Bar Counsel and others of allegations that Freedom resident, Clyde Wallace Stock, had

 

' Owing to road closures between Casper and Green River, Ms, Olson and Mr. Lawson attended
by telephone,
‘engaged in the unauthorized practice of law (“UPL”). Exhibit BC-1. Stock’s filings inthis matter
indicate that he considers himself a sovereign citizen who frequently files declarations to that effect

with the Lincoln County Clerk. See,

 

hibit BC-IS. According o Voyles" letter, the victims
of Stock's UPL were Voyles' longtime clients, Richard and Geraldine Casul, residents of
Freedom, Wyoming. According to Voyles letter, “Mr. Casull is terminally ill with cancer and
‘Mrs, Cesllis incapacitated with dementia.”

2, Mr. Casll ded May 6, 2018, at age 87. Biographical information about Mr. Casull
is readily available online and identifies him as “a Salt Lake City-born guns

 

and wildeat
cartridge developer whose experiments with .45 Colt ammunition in the 1950s led tothe creation
‘of the 454 Casull cartridge. Casull

 

passion was six-shooters, and he was determined to create a

 

high velocity round for the .45 Colt" In 1978, Casull and a partner crested Freedom Arms in
Freedom, Wyoming. His online obituary indicates that Casull died in Freedom, Wyoming, and is
buried in Freedom Cemetery in Freedom, idaho. The obituary reports, “Dick held 17 major firearm
patents and was voted Outstanding American Hand Gunner in 1987 along with many other awards
lover the years.” According to her online obituary, Geraldine Casull died February 19, 2019, She
was 87.

3. Freedom isan unincorporated community located in northwestern Lincoln County,
Wyoming, and straddles the Wyoming-Idaho line. The 2010 census lists the population of |
Freedom, Wyoming, at 214,

4, According to Voyles' leter to Bar Counsel, the Dick and Jeri Casull Living Trust
‘was created in 2007 and was prepared by Bowers Law Firm in Afton, Wyoming (see copy of 2007
‘ust agreement, Exhibit BC-2). Thereafter, Casulls hired Voyles to amend the trust agreement
‘twice, once in 2010 (UPL 045-048) and again in 2016 (UPL 042-044).
5. With respeet to Stock’s involvement with the trust, Voyles’ letter provided the
following narrative:

In October, 2017, Mr. Stock convinced Mr. Casull to execute what is titled the
“D & G Bullet Trust, a business trust” {see Exhibit BC-3], supposedly in
ievocable complex trust. He told Mr. Casull the trust would protect his business
assets but would not include his personal property. Mr. Stock made himself one of
the “trustees” in the “trust” document.

 

Mr. Stock had Mr. and Mrs. Casull sign a quitclaim deed that put their real
property ~ which includes their personal residence - into the “trust". That action
‘showed his complete misrepresentation to Mr. and Mrs, Casull of what was being
‘accomplished through the documents he was asking them to sign, Furthermore, it

‘my opinion that due to her mental infirmity, Mrs. Casull clearly lacked capacity
to sign a deed.

 

 

Finally, Mr. Stock had Mr. Casull execute a new power of atorney that has
designated him as Mr, Casull’s Attomey-in-Fact (see Exhibit BC-8]. He also had
Mrs. Casull sign a new power of attomey that made Mr. Casull her Attorey-in-
Fact {see Exhibit BC-7). It is my opinion that Mrs, Casull lacked capacity to sign
such a document,

AAs the grand finale of Mr. Sock’s “estate planning” efforts for Mr. and Mrs.
CCasull, Mr. Stock advised them not to “let the lewyers” know what they had
‘executed. He explained thatthe lawyers “would not understand” and would “only
ress things up”.

 

  

To the best of my knowiedge, information, and belief, itis my opinion that Mr.
CCasull did not read and did not understand the “trust” proffered by Mr. Stock. Itis
‘my opinion that Mr. Casull had no idea thet the title to his property is no longer
his name and that of his wife as Trustees oftheir 2007 Trust. And itis my opinion
‘that Mrs. Casull has no understanding of anything that has transpired as a result of
Mr. Stock’s actions.

    

6. Voyles’leter continued, “It is likely that legal action will be necessary to clear the
title to (Casulls"] real property since it has been clouded by the conveyance to & purported
“imevocable trust’... Itis also my opinion that Mr. Stock needs to be stopped from preying on
«elderly people in such fashion... Mr. Stock should be held responsible, and he should be estopped
from harming others.”
7. On April 13, 2018, Voyles sent an email to the Office of Bar Counsel advising that
Voyles had obtained a ttle guarantee insuring the property tite forthe 2007 trust Attached to his
email were several affidavits, all reportedly prepared by Stock. See Exhibit BC-10, The
stachments included an affidavit from Martin T, Occhi, who testified that Stock had asked him to
serve asa trusee on the D & G Bullet Trust in October 2017. Also attached was an affidavit from
‘Stock, who testified that he prepared the wo powers of attomey at Dick Casull's request and that
he reviewed the 2007 Trust, also at Casull’s request:

| di read {the 2007 Trust Agreement] and then told him that I did not know if that

living trast would protect his assets or not. I then told him that Rea [Stock] and I

had a trust that protected us several times from lawsuits, and that could have lost

‘everything we had, if t had not been for the Trust thet was in place. He then asked

re if could help him get trust, like what Rea and I used that would protect his
‘and Gers property.

UPL 088.

8. On April 24, 2018, the Office of Bar Counsel received a formal UPL report from
Jackson attorney, Andrew Irvine, who submitted the report on behalf of M. Daniel Cerey, an adult
nephew of Casulls, Exhibit BC-11. The report named both Stock and Occhi as respondents and
‘provided the following narrative:

Mr. Stock and Mr. Occhi provided advice, expressed legal opinions and drafted
legal documents for Mr. Richard Cesull and Mrs. Geraldine B, Casull without
having been admitted to practice law in Wyoming. Mr. Casull is dying of cancer
‘and does not have the capacity or will © manage his property and personal affairs.
Likewise, Mrs. Casull suffers from severe dementia and lacks capacity to make
decisions for herself. It appears that Mssrs. Stock and Occhi preyed on this sick
‘and elderly couple in order to undo their long-standing trust agreement and take
their property and assets for their own.

 

9. tached to the report were Vayles’ letter of February 20, 2018 (Exhibit BC-1),
‘along with copies of the documents allegedly prepared by Stock and Occhi, most of which had
been attached to Voyles" letter.
10.

In early May 2018, a letter of

 

uiry was sent by Bar Counsel to Stock, along with

' copy of Irvine's UPL report. Mr. Stock was asked to respond in writing by May 23, 2018,

Exhibit BC-12,

nh.

BC-13):

Stock’s response, dated May 18, 2018, was received on May 29, 2018 (Exhibit

Dear Mr.

 

ts

‘Thank you for giving me the option of answering this Complaint myself, and
‘ot have to use an attorney. Iam in my 84 year and the caretaker of my invalid
wife of 65 years. I have limited income, s0 I appreciate your consideration,

have never intended to practice aw. I do not know how to practice law. If
what | did appeared to be the practice of law, I apologize. At Dick [Casull]'s
request, I did adapt our estate plan (the trust) over to Dick and Geri, so they would
hhave some asset protection. I duplicated Dick's original trust, just as he requested.
My intent was only to help an old friend of mine for over 50 years, and not to
practice law.

AAs for the egregious claims made by M. Daniel Carey/Andrelrvine (sic) and
Kevin Voyles, , would be happy to answer the charges point by point any time you
Want to see my response, I know you are busy, $0 1 will not take your time to
their egregious claims at this time. There may be a law firm in Salt Lake
City ready to counterclaim any lawsuit filed trying to extort money from me to pay
Dan Cary’s [sic] legal fees. They fee! Dan is guilty of harassment & extortion.

 

{Lam including the 9 minute orders of the D&G Bullet Trust, justin case you
are interested and have not seen them all, also My affidavit dated: 8 March 2018

| hope this will explain the situation to your satisfaction. If you need more
‘information I would be very happy to answer any questions or supply more
information,

12, Attached to Stock’s response were a copy of the affidavit previously provided by
Voyles along with a number of “minutes” ~ ostensibly, directives signed by Mr. Casull regarding,

his intentions for management ofthe trust. Exhibit BC-9, The “minutes” included a copy of a
‘uitclaim deed recorded with the Lincoln County Clerk on November 1, 2017, by which Casulls

urportedly transferred

 

to their real propery tothe D & G Bullet Trust. Exhibit BC-4. The

5
filing of this document presumably created the title problem that Voyles resolved in April 2018 by

 

‘obtaining a commitment from a title insurance company for the Casulls’ property that had been
pt in the D & G Bullet Trust,

13. On July 10, 2018, Stock sent a letter fo Bar Counsel to which he attached a list of
ceases pulled from the Internet which he said shows he does not need a license to practice law in
any event. Exhibit BC-14.

14, Inorder to clear up the ttle problems created by Stock’s conduct, it was necessary
for Voyles to obtain an appraisal anda title commitment. Exhibit BC-18, The out-of-pocket costs
Of that effort were $1,889.00. Exhibit BC-17, Legal fees associated with clearing the tile
exceeded $2,500.00 (see Exhibit BC-1

 

), bringing the total expenses incurred as a result of
Stock’s conduct to $4,464.00.
15. On March 29, 2019, Bar Counsel wrote to Stock as follows:

| have completed my investigation of the above-referenced matter, which was
conducted pursuant to the Wyoming Supreme Court's Rules of Procedure
Governing Unauthorized Practice of Law (the “Rules"). It is my conclusion that
there is indisputable evidence that you engaged in the unauthorized practice of law
in Wyoming by (1) preparing the D & G Bullet Trust and related documents; (2)
preparing and recording the quitclaim deed transferring the Casull property to the
‘D&G Bullet Trust; and (3) preparing the general power of attorney of Richard J.
Casull, Your actions necessitated the expenditure of significant attomey fees and
‘elated costs in clearing the title on the Casull real property and rescinding the
{general power of attorney.

‘Bar Counsel proposed to resolve the matter as follows:

 

Before advancing this matter to a formal hearing before the Committee on the
Unauthorized Practice of Law (the “Commitiee"), 1 would like to propose @
reasonable resolution that may avoid the need for a hearing. This proposal
‘contemplates that you enter into a consent agreement requiring you to (1) refrain
any further incidents of the unauthorized practice of law; (2) make restitution; and
(3) pay a fine for each incident of the unauthorized practice of law.

Under the Rules, a person who enters into a consent agreement may be required
‘o pay restitution. The Rules also provide that a person wo enters into a consent
‘agreement may be required to pay a fine that may range from $100.00 to $250.00

6
 

per incident of unauthorized practice of law. My proposal to resolve this matter by

into # consent is conditioned upon your agreement 10 pay
teaiton In he amoum of $4464.00 anda fine of $00.0 (6100.00 for cach of
the te lncdens of unauthosoed practice of law). ‘Thus, he tal amount you
‘would be required to pay under a consent agreement is $4,764.00,

 

Exhibit BC-19.

16. Stock did not respond (othe proposal. Instead, he sent an “Express Notice of
“Waiver of Tort™ which contained an apparent offer to settle his claims against Bar Counsel and
others in exchange for a payment of $620,000.00. Exhibit BC-22. A month later, Stock sent a
“Notice of Default and Opportunity to Cure” which apparently reiterated his settlement demand.
Exhibit BC23.

17, On May 13,2019, Bar Couns! filed a Petition for Civil Injunction and Other Relief
with the Wyoming Supreme Court. On May 21, 2019, the Court referred the petition to this
Committee for hearing. Respondent's answer tothe petition, filed June 20, 2019, begins with the
following:

Respondent is not now nor ever has been a resident of Freedom, Wyoming.
Respondent disavows, past or present, any residency in any DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA teritorial construct called a county. Respondent believes that no
evidence exists that Respondent has ever been a resident of any county in Wyoming
‘or any other state. Therefore, the court has no in personam jurisdiction. The BAR
and ther ules and power over the Respondent does not exist. Respondent has no
evidence ofthis court's jurisdiction and believes none exist,

18. A telephonic scheduling conference was held July 19, 2019, and was attended by
Castine Stickley, Commitce Chair; Mark Gifford, Bar Counsel; and Respondent Clyde Wallace
Stock.

19, Following the telephonic scheduling conference an Order Setting Detes and
Deadlines was entered July 25, 2019. Deadlines were established for discovery and the pre-
‘hearing fling of witnesses and exhibits by the parties. The matter was set for hearing on the 20%
ay of September, 2019,

 

Green River, Wyoming.
7
20. By Onder dated August 21, 2019, the location of the hearing was changed to the

Sweetwater County Justice Center

 

Rock Springs, Wyoming. However, the September 20
hearing date remained.

21. On September 17,2019, Stock sent an email io Committee Char Stickle in which
he stated that he was ill and unable to attend the September 20 hearing. Chair Stckley responded
with the following email:

Mr. Stock:

‘Although you did not provide the [medical] documentation requested, your request

fora continuation ofthe hearing scheduled for September 20" is granted. However,

‘because of the time and expense involved in rescheduling, there will only be one

continuance granted. A default will be entered agsinst you if you are unable to

attend the next hearing date that is scheduled.

Ms. Howshar will be rescheduling the date for the hearing and will be in contact
with you.

Exhibit BC-26.

22. On September 30, 2019, Stock filed a “Motion for Dismissal of Case Due to Lack
‘of Personam Jurisdiction” in which Stock argued among other things thet any requirement that
persons providing legal services has to be licensed to practice law is contrary to law. Inthe same
filing, Stock admitted o preparing the D & G Bullet Trust as well a the general powers of atiorney
{for Mr. and Mrs. Casull.

23, On September 30, 2019, Bar Counsel filed a response in which he pointed out that
‘Stock himseif is a licensed professional, holding a dental license issued by the Wyoming Board of
Dental Examiners,

24, On October 16,2019, an Order was entered rescheduling the hearing for December
3,2019, in Green River, Wyoming.
25. On October 29, 2019, Stock filed a reply to Bar Counsel's objection to Stock’s
motion for dismissal. In it, Stock announced that he had requested that his dental license be
cancelled

26, On November 19, 2019, Chair Stickle entered an Order denying Stock’s motion
for dismissal.

27. On Sunday evening, December 1, 2019, an individual apparently acting on Stock’s
behalf sent Chair tickley and Bar Counsel an email to wich was attached a document entitled
“Witness Testimony in the Form of an Affidavit” signed by Stock. Included with the 13-page
alidavit was the following statement signed by Stock:

‘This isto notify you that Iwill not atend the mectng on the 3° of December. 1

have been very sick. Iam with my daughter in Salt Lake so that she can take care

fiend ny wi wm unbatoven pt menor crf my wit wit
Stock’

   

fidavit was not accompanied by a motion for continuance, It is significant that despite
his claimed illness, Stock was able to prepare a 13-page affidavit and submit it two days before
the hearing. Consistent with the notice previously provided by Chair Stickley, the December 3
hearing proceeded as a default hearing.

28. The hearing focused on Stock’s commission of four separate acts consttuing the
‘unauthorized practice of law: (1) preperation of the D & G Bullet Trust dated October 26, 2017
(Exhibit BC-3); (2) preparation ofthe Quitelaim Deed dated October 26, 2017, and recorded with
the Lincoln County Clerk on November 1, 2017, purporting to convey real property from Mr. and
Mrs Casull’s living trust to the D & G Bullet Trust (Exhibit BC-4); (3) preparation of « General
Power of Attormey for Geraldine B. Casull dated November 2, 2017 (Exhibit BC-7); and (4)
reparation ofa General Power of Atwomney for Richard J. Casull dated November 3, 2017 (Exhibit
BC+). IL is undisputed thet Stock prepared all four documents,
29. At the hearing, Voyles testified that he had represented Mr. and Mrs. Casull for
‘several years, including preparation of two amendments to thei living trast (one in 2010 and a
‘second in 2016) which had originally been prepared by the Bowers Law Firm in 2007. See Ex!

 

it
BC-2, Voyles tested that he first became aware of Stock’s unauthorized practice of law when
Mr. and Mrs. Casull’s nephew (and principle beneficiary of ther esate), Dan Carey, brought
copies ofthe D & G Bullet Trust and related documents o Voyles’ office. Upon review of the
documents, Voyies identified a numberof potentially harmful consequences, including a potential
cloud onthe title to Mr. and Mrs. Casull’s residence and adjacent property.

30. _Voyles set about implementing remedial measures to mitigate the damage done by
‘Stock’s conduct, including meeting with Carey and Stock and urging Stock to rescind his actions
‘with respect to the D & G Bullet Trust as well asthe quitclaim deed and general powers of attomey.
‘Stock claimed that he never intended to harm the Casulls bu was only trying to help his friends.
‘Voyles testified that he was not persuaded by Stock’s feigned innocence. Voyles suspected that
this was part of larger scheme by Stock and a few cohorts to obtain control of Casull” estat,
including a large gun collection as well as Mr. Casul's drawings and other proprietary materials
relating to his numerous arms-related inventions,

31. Voyles, who has extensive experience with trust, estate planning and real property
‘aw, was troubled by a number of unusual provisions ofthe D & G Bullet Trust, including:

‘The Trust purported tobe an irevocable business trust.

‘* “Property” encompassed by the Trust included “real and personal movable or immovable
‘property of any description and whoscsoever situate including (without limiting, the
generality thereof polices, cash, chose inaction, deeds, ies assignment, morgage and

* Ownership of property in the Trust would be held by the Trustees, Stock and a cohort,
Martin T. Occhi, who “shall have absolute and sole authority o determine what shall

Constitute principal and earnings (corpus and income) and shall have authority to determine
ifand when distributions will be made to the Beneficiary(s).”

10
‘+ The Trust contemplated appointment of a General Manager who would be authorized 10
issue “ninety-nine (99) Certificates of Capital Unis (hereinafter called Capital Units)
representing ninety-nine percent (99%) ofthe beneficial interest inthe Trust Estate.” The
General Manager “may make loans whether secured or unsecured and whether with or
‘without interest to any person.”

‘+ The Trusiees would be entitled to reimbursement of “all direct and indirect expenses of the
‘Trust incurred or paid on behalf of the Trust, or expenses used to mainiain twenty-four
hour monitoring and availability to the Trust and the Trust businesss).”

+ Among the expenses to be paid by the trust were the “cost of all emergency, medical and
dental care, and health, life, and retirement insurance for the Trust Officers to continue,”
the “cost and maintenance of a place of business, offices and plants, and the Trust
Headquarters, and furnishings, assets, supplies and personne! to properly conduct the
affairs of the Trus;” and “the cost of performance awards and ‘Prizes’ awarded to all
contract workers ofthe Trust and the Trust business."

* The Trust provided that the Trustees would have “absolute and uncontroled disretion and
ower” and would “not be liable for any loss or damage occuring asa result of the exercise
of such discretion or power.”

‘+ The Trustees “shall not be required to obtain authority or approval of any court in the
exercise of any power conferred hereunder and shall not be required to make current reports
or any accounting thereto.”

‘+ The Trustees were empowered to determine their own compensation.

‘+ The Trust concluded with a provision that “ll other trusts and/or wills are null & void.”

32, Voyles testified that he requested a tile commitment from a reputable title
insurance company, Wyoming Title & Escrow. In reviewing title to the Casulls’ property, the ttle
company discovered @ number of affidavits by Stock and his cohorts disclaiming any nefarious
‘intent with respect to the D & G Bullet Trust and related documents, most if not all of which had
apparently been prepared by Stock and fled with the Lincoln County Clerk. See Exhibit BC.
Voyles testified that he was shocked when the ttle company indicated that the company was

 

‘willing to issue a title commitment that did not list the Quite

 

Deed prepared by Stock as one
of the exceptions from coverage set forth in Schedule B. See Exhibit BC-18. Voyles testified
‘thatthe property is currently up for sale and could not rule out the potential for a future quit ttle
‘action even with the title commitment. Voyles estimated that the cost of such an action would be
$5,000.00 to $10,000.00.
33. Voyles testified that the legal fes associated with curing the title problems created
by the D & G Bullet Trust and the Quitclaim Deed were $2,575.00. In addition, out-of-pocket
costs (the cost of an appraisal, the tile company’s fee and recording fees) totaled $1,889.00,
bringing the total costs of remediation to $4,464.00.

34, Dan Carey testified regarding his relationship with his uncle, Dick Casull, and
described Casull asthe kindest person he has ever known. Carey attributes his career as @ Navy
and commercial airline pilot to a plane ride Carey took with his uncle when Carey was 17 years
old, The Casulls never had children of their

 

‘Carey considered Casull to bea father figure.
35. Carey testified that he and his wife, Nancy, cared for the Casulls in their final

illnesses, moving Mr. Casull into their home during the final months of his life, Carey testified

 

‘regarding his discovery ofthe D & G Bullet Trust and related documents in notebook in Casulls’
hhome. When Carey asked his uncle about it, Casull explained that it was a business trast that his
fiend, Clyde Stock, had prepared to give them betir protection for ther assets.

36. Carey testified regarding his mesting with Voyles who, upon review of the D & G
Bullet Trust and related paperwork, had serious concems about the potential harms posed by the
‘documents. When Carey relayed those concems to his uncle, Casull asked, “Can you help us get
it back?” It was at that point the Carey engaged Voyles’ services to implement the remedial
‘measures discussed above.

37. Carey also testified to a brief encounter he had with Stock ata restaurant in Star
Valley, during which Stock cautioned Carey against discussing the Trust with lawyers who,
‘according to Stock, “wouldn't understand it.” Carey echoed Voyles’ suspicions that the Trust and
related documents were part of a larger scheme by Stock and his cohorts to obiain ownership of
‘the Cesulls' estate including Mr. Cesull’s gun collection, patents, drawings and inventions.

2
38. Based on the foregoing, the Committee finds that Stock engaged in atleast four
incidents of the unauthorized practice of law: (1) preparation of the D & G Bullet Trust dated
October 26,2017 (Exhibit BC-3); (2) preparation ofthe Quitlaim Deed dated October 26,2017,
snd recorded with the Lincoln County Clerk on November 1, 2017, purporting to convey real
Property from Mr. and Mrs. Casul’s living trust tothe D & G Bullet Trust (Exhibit BC-4); (3)
Preparation of a General Power of Attomey for Geraldine B, Casull dated November 2, 2017
(Exhibit BC-7); and (4) preperation of a General Power of Attomey for Richard J. Casull dated
November 3,2017 (Exhibit BC-8).

39. The Commitee further find that Stock should be required to pay restitution to Dan
Carey inthe amount of $4,464.00.

40. The Committee further finds that Stock should be required to pay a fine in the
‘mount of $1,000.00 foreach ineident of the unauthorized practice of law, for a total fine of
4,000.00.

41. The Committe further finds that Stock should be required to reimburse the
‘Wyoming State Bar for costs associated with this investigation and hearing.

‘Conclusions of Law

42, Wyoming Statue § 33-5-117, entitled “Unauthorized Practice,” provides, “It shall
‘be unlawful, and punishable as contempt of cour, for any person not a member of the Wyoming
State bar to hold himself out or advertise by whatsoever means as an atiomey or counselorat-law.”

43. Rule 7 of the Rules Governing the Wyoming State Bar and the Authorized Practice
‘of law provides in pertinent part

Rule 7. Authorization to practice law.

(@) The following persons are authorized to practice law in Wyoming:

(1) Members of the Wyoming State Bar, as more fully delineated and subject
to the limitations set forth in the Bylaws of the Wyoming State Bar;

 

13
@) Attomeys who have been granted pro hac viee admission as provided in
ale 8 subject tothe limitations set forth in that rule;
@) Law school clinic supervising attorneys meeting the qualifications of Rule
9, subject to the limitations set forth in that rale;
(4) Law students meeting the qualifications of Rule 9, subject tothe
limitations set forth in that rule; and
(5) Attomeys mecting the qualifications of Rule 5.5(4) of the Wyoming Rules
‘of Professional Conduct, subject to the limitations set forth in that rule.
(b) “Practice law” means providing any legal service for any other person, firm
‘ot corporation, with or without compensation, of providing professional legal
advice or services where there is client relationship of trust or reliance,
including appearing as an advocate ina representative capacity; drafting
pleadings or other documents; or performing any act ina representative
‘in connection with a prospective or pending procesding before any

 

 

44, The Rules of Procedure Governing Unauthorized Practice of Law Proceedings
provide in pertinent part:
Rule $, Investigation,

(OI, after conducting an investigation, Bar Counsel believes that the
respondent has engaged inthe unauthorized practice of law, Bar Counsel may do
one or more of the following:

(2) commence evil injunction proceedings as provided in Rule 6;
@) commence civil contempt proceedings as provided in Rule 8;
) enter into consent agreement with the respondent in which the
respondent agrees todo one or more ofthe followin
(A) refrain from the conduct in question
(B) refund any fes collected;
(©) make restitution;
(©) pay fine that may range ftom one hundred dollars ($100) to
two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) per incident of unauthorized
Practice of law.

Rule 6. Civil injunction proceedings.

(8) If Bar Counsel determines that civil injunction proceedings should be
instituted against @ respondent, including when seeking approval of a consent
‘agreement entered into under subparagraph (3) of paragraph (f) of Rule 5, Bar
Counsel may commence such proceedings in the name of the Committee by fling
‘a petition in the Supreme Court. The petition shall be in writing and shall set forth
the facts and charges in plain language and wit sufficient particularity to inform
the respondent of the acts that Bar Counsel contends constitute the unauthorized
practice of law. The petition shall specify the requested relief, which may include,
Without limitation, injunction, refund, restitution, a fine and assessment of costs of

 

4
the proceeding, or the approval ofa consent agreement. Bar Counsel shall, at the
time offing the petition, serve a copy upon the respondent by certified mail

(©) Upon receipt of & petition filed by Bar Counsel in accordance with
paragraph (a) of this rule, the Court may issue an order referring the matter to the
‘Committee for further proceedings in accordance with paragraphs (4) through (h)
ofthis rule.

(©) Ifthe Court refers a case tothe Committee under paragraph (b) ofthis rule,
the Court shall order the respondent to file with the Committee a writen answer
admitting or denying the matter stated in the petition. Unless otherwise ordered by
the Cour, the answer shall be filed within twenty (20) days after service of the
‘Court's order onthe respondent.

(h) Notice of findings, conclusions, and recommended disposition.

() Within tity (30) days of receipt of the parties’ proposed findings
of fact, conclusions of law, and recommended disposition of the case, the
‘Commitee shall submit tothe Supreme Court the record of the hearing end &
written report setting forth the Committe’s findings of fact, conclusions of law,
and recommended final disposition of the case. A copy of the written report
shall be mailed to respondent and Bar Counsel,

@)__If the Committce concludes in the report thatthe respondent has
engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, then the Committee may
recommend that a fine be imposed foreach incident of unauthorized practice of
law; the minimum fine for each incident shall be not less than two hundred and
{fy dollars ($250) and not more than one thousand dollars ($1000)

Rule 7. Determination by the Supreme Court,

(@) Respondent may file a response with the Court tothe Committee's report
and recommendations ‘within thirty (30) days of mailing of the report and
‘recommendations to respondent. Respondent shall copy of the response to
Bar Counsel, A response shall state respondents objections tothe written repor.
tri, ‘The Court yal its discretion, order respondent or Bar Counsel to file

on any issue the Court determines appropriate and may order oral argument
before the Court. ee me

(©) After reviewing the Committee’s report and recommendations, any
‘response by respondent, the record, and any briefs and oral argument submitted by
‘the parties, the Court may adopt, modi ‘or reject the Committee's
recommenditions, in whole or in part, and shall determine as @ mater of law
‘whether the respondent hasbeen engaged in the unauthorized practice of law or, in
the case of a consent agreement, whether to acceptor reject the agreement. In
reaching its decison, the Court will give due consideration to the Commite’s
factual findings. The Court will review de novo the Committee’s conclusions of
law and recommended disposition,

@) If the Court finds that the respondent has engaged in the unauthorized
rate of lw, he Court may eter an order rang any or loft allowing
relief:

 

 

 

1s
(1) enjoining the respondent from further conduct found to constitute
the unauthorized practice of law;
@) imposing on the respondent any fines recommended by the

‘Committee;

G) ordering restitution;

(4) assessing the costs ofthe proceedings against the respondent; and/or

(©) ordering such other and further reli as the Court deems proper.
Rule 11. General provisions.

(@) In determining whether particular conduct involves the unauthorized
practice of law, Bar Counsel, the Committee and the Court shall be guided by the
following principles:

(1) The Court's rules regarding the authorized practice of law.
@)__Thecore element of practicing law is the giving of legal advice to a
lent. Factors o be applied in determining between legal and non-legal advice

 

 

include:
(A) the specificity ofthe advice;
(B) the likelihood thatthe advice will be erroneous; and
(©) _the degree of harm to the reci ‘the advice is erroneous.
G) Any activity which calls for the exercise of discretion, such as

 

interviewing or advising another about the legal effect of certain choices,
involves the practice of law.

(Receiving money for drafting documents or performing other
services involving legal matters constitutes the practice of law.

(5) Holding one's self out as qualified to assist others in legal matters
‘constitutes the practice of law.

(6, Teton for rescting the prec of law to lawyers isto prtet
the publi.

(2) __ Inthe absence of case law in Wyoming, deference should be given
to the weight of authority from other jurisdictions.

‘Recommendations
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Committee
recommends that the Court issue an order:

  

 

ng Respondent from further conduct constituting the unauthorized practice

 

Imposing fines upon Respondent inthe amount of $4,000.00;
Requiring Respondent o pay restitution to Dan Carey inthe amount of $4,464.00;

 
4. Assessing the cass ofthese proceedings against Respondent.
paten tis [2 sey ot Demir, 2019.

in Stickley, Chair
‘Committee on the Unauthorized Practice of Law
Wyoming State Bar

"7