Case Title: In re Sinnott

Citation: 178 Vt. 646, 2005 VT 109, 891 A.2d 896

Docket Number: 2005-337

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2005-08-25T00:00:00Z

Document:
In re Sinnott (2005-337); 178 Vt. 646; 891 A.2d 896

[2005 VT 109]

[Filed 25-Aug-2005]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2005-337
       
                              AUGUST TERM, 2005

  In re Howard Sinnott, Esq.     }     Original Jurisdiction
                                 }
                                 }
                                 }     Professional Responsibility Board
                                 }     
                                 }
                                 }     PRB File No. 2002-240

       In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

       The Professional Responsibility Board had submitted a recommendation
  that attorney Howard Sinnott be disbarred.  The recommendation is based
  upon the affidavit of resignation submitted by attorney Sinnott and an
  additional statement of facts and memorandum of law submitted by
  disciplinary counsel.  The undisputed facts reveal that attorney Sinnott
  was indicted by a federal grand jury for offenses relating to the
  misappropriation of over $500,000 in client funds, and that, in February
  2005, pursuant to a plea agreement, attorney Sinnott pled guilty to two
  felony counts of interstate transmission of stolen property, in violation
  of 18 U.S.C. § 2341.  Based on these facts, the Court finds clear and
  convincing evidence that attorney Sinnott violated Rules 8.4(c) (conduct
  involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation), 8.4(d) (conduct
  prejudicial to the administration of justice), and 8.4(h) (conduct that
  adversely reflects on the lawyer's fitness to practice law) of the Vermont
  Rules of Professional Conduct.  Accordingly, attorney Sinnott's resignation
  and the recommendation of the Board that attorney Sinnott be disbarred are
  accepted.  We hereby order that Howard Sinnott is disbarred from the office
  of attorney and counselor at law.  

       Attorney Sinnott shall comply with the requirements of A.O. 9, Rule
  23.    

       FOR THE COURT:

       _______________________________________
       Paul L. Reiber, Chief Justice

       _______________________________________
       John A. Dooley, Associate Justice

       _______________________________________
       Denise R. Johnson, Associate Justice

       _______________________________________
       Marilyn S. Skoglund, Associate Justice

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
79 PRB

[Filed 12-Aug-2005]

                              STATE OF VERMONT
                      PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD

  In re:      Howard Sinnott, Esq.
              PRB Docket No. 2002-240

                              Decision No.   79

       Upon receipt of the Affidavit of Resignation submitted to the Board
  and pursuant to Administrative Order No. 9, Rule 19, we recommend to the
  Court that the above referenced Respondent be disbarred.   Attached hereto
  are the Affidavit of Resignation, Disciplinary Counsel's Statement of
  Additional Facts - Paragraphs 1-4 and 6-10, Disciplinary Counsel's
  Memorandum of Law, and Exhibits B-D.(FN1) 

       Dated at Montpelier, Vermont this  12th  day of August, 2005.

  _________________________
  Joan Loring Wing, Esq. - Chair

  attachments

  cc:     Howard Sinnott
          Michael Kennedy, Disciplinary Counsel

  ---------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Footnotes

FN1.  Respondent requested, and Disciplinary Counsel did not object, that
      Paragraph 5 of the Statement of Additional Facts and Exhibit A be
      stricken from the record.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     

                              STATE OF VERMONT
                     PROFESSIONIAL RESPONSIBILITY BOARD

In Re: Howard Sinnott, Esq., Respondent 
       PRB File No. 2002.240

                              Memorandum of Law

       NOW COMES Disciplinary Counsel Michael Kennedy and submits this
  Memorandum of Law in support of his position that the Statement of
  Additional Facts, which is incorporated by reference herein, supports a
  finding that Attorney Sinnott violated the Vermont Rules of Professional
  Conduct.

I  Rule 8.4(b) of the Vermont Rules of Professional Conduct

       Rule 8.4(b) prohibits attorneys from engaging in conduct involving a
  serious crime. The Rule defines a "serious crime" as "illegal conduct
  involving any felony", as well as certain types of lesser crimes.

       In September of 2004, a federal grand jury returned a Second
  Superseding Indictment against Attorney Sinnott (Exhibit C). In February of
  2005, Attorney Sinnott pled guilty to Counts 11 and 13 of the Second
  Superseding Indictment (Exhibit D).  More specifically, Attorney Sinnott
  pled guilty to two counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 2341. The statute
  prohibits the interstate transmission of stolen property. The crime is
  punishable by up to ten years in prison. As such, it is a felony. See 18
  U.S.C. § 3559(a). In that the crime to which he pled guilty is a felony, it
  is also a "serious crime". Therefore, the facts support a finding that
  Attorney Sinnott violated Rule 8.4(b) by engaging in conduct involving a
  serious crime.

II The Offense of Misappropriation & Additional Violations

       At its heart, this case involves the misappropriation, if not outright
  theft, of client funds. That is, in pleading guilty to Counts 11 and 13 of
  the Second Superseding Indictment, Attorney Sinnott admitted to having
  transmitted in interstate commerce over $500,000 that he knew had been
  stolen, converted, or taken by fraud from clients. Several jurisdictions
  have defined "misappropriation". For instance, the Nebraska Supreme Court
  recently stated that

       "[i]n the context of attorney discipline proceedings,
       'misappropriation' is any unauthorized use of client funds
       entrusted to an attorney, including not only stealing, but
       also unauthorized temporary use for the attorney's own
       purpose, whether or not the attorney derives any personal
       gain or benefit therefrom."

  State ex rel. Counsel for Dis. v. Wintroub,