Case Title: In re Butterfield

Citation: 170 Vt. 592, 750 A.2d 439

Docket Number: 

State: vermont

Court: Vermont Supreme Court

Date: 2000-01-27T00:00:00Z

Document:
In re Butterfield  (99-531); 170 Vt. 592; 750 A.2d 439

[Filed 27-Jan-2000]

                                 ENTRY ORDER

                       SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 99-531

                             JANUARY TERM, 2000

In re Mark Butterfield, Esq.	}	Original Jurisdiction
                                }
                                }
     	                        }	Professional Conduct Board
                                }	
                                }
                                }	DOCKET NOS. 98.29 & 99.03

       Pursuant to the recommendation of the Professional Conduct Board filed
  December 3, 1999, and  approval thereof, it is hereby ordered that Mark
  Butterfield, Esq. be publicly reprimanded for the  reasons set forth in the
  Board's report attached hereto for publication as part of the order of this 
  Court.  A.O. 9, Rule 8E.

BY THE COURT:

_______________________________________
Jeffrey L. Amestoy, Chief Justice

_______________________________________
John A. Dooley, Associate Justice

_______________________________________
James L. Morse, Associate Justice

_______________________________________
Denise R. Johnson, Associate Justice

_______________________________________
Marilyn S. Skoglund, Associate Justice

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
143.PCB

[3-Dec-1999]

                              STATE OF VERMONT
                         PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT BOARD

In Re:	Mark Butterfield, Esq.
        PCB File Nos. 98.29 & 99.03

                             DECISION NO.   143

Procedural History

       On March 23, 1999, the Office of Bar Counsel ("OBC") filed Petitions
  of Misconduct  against Respondent (File Nos. 98.29 and 99.03).  Respondent
  received copies of the two petitions  by certified mail on March 23, 1999. 
  Respondent did not answer the petition within 20 days as  required by the
  rules, and on April 19, 1999, the OBC moved to have the charges deemed 
  admitted.  On May 4, 1999, the Hearing Panel granted the OBC's April 19,
  1999 motion. (FN1)

       The Hearing Panel held a sanctions hearing on June 4, 1999. 
  Respondent and  Mr. Kennedy, Deputy Bar Counsel, attended.  At the close of
  the hearing the parties asked the  Hearing Panel to postpone its decision
  until after the parties could submit a joint filing setting  forth joint
  representations made by the parties at the hearing.

       On June 10, 1999, the parties submitted their joint filing.  In the
  filing, Respondent  admitted the facts set forth in the Fact sections of
  this decision, and advised the Hearing Panel of  the following:

              a..	The Respondent's license to practice law is up
         for renewal on July 1, 1999.
                                                                     

              b..	The Respondent does not intend to renew his
         license and has previously  informed the hearing panel that
         he will not renew it.

              c..	The Respondent intends to close his practice
         as soon as possible.

              d..	Pending the closing of his practice, the
         Respondent will employ a  mentoring attorney who will assist
         him in preparing an inventory of all his files.

              e..	As part of the inventory of his files, the
         Respondent agrees to present bar  counsel, the panel, and the
         Board a plan for closing down his practice.  That plan will 
         include, but not be limited to, the Respondent withdrawing
         from all pending cases.  The  Respondent will provide the
         plan to bar counsel no later than June 18, 1999.

              f..	The close down plan will also include, but not
         be limited to, a detailed plan  of how the Respondent will
         protect the interests of each current client.  The plan will 
         specify how the Respondent will notify each client that he is
         closing his practice and will  specify how the Respondent
         will transfer each file to another attorney or assist the
         client in  finding another attorney.

              g..	The Respondent agrees to present bar counsel
         and the Board a complete  financial accounting, including
         trust account information, of his practice.  The Respondent 
         will provide the accounting to bar counsel no later than June
         18, 1999.

              h..	The Respondent agrees not to take any new
         clients or cases pending the  closing of his practice.

              i..	The Respondent agrees to purchase, if
         available, prior act coverage as part  of his malpractice
         insurance.

              j..	On June 4, 1999, at a hearing before the
         panel, the Respondent agreed to  meet with Attorney John
         Webber no later than June 7, 1999, to address issues about
         the  Respondent's current condition.  The Respondent met with
         Attorney Webber on June 7  and 9, and plans on meeting with
         him again.

              k..	On June 4, 1999, at a hearing before the
         panel, the Respondent agreed to  seek medical attention and
         to have visited a doctor or mental health professional by
         June  11, 1999.  The Respondent sought and received medical
         help.  He met with his general  physician as well as with
         doctors at the Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center.  In 
         addition, the Respondent's physician arranged an appointment
         with a mental health  professional.
                                                                     

       The parties also advised the Hearing Panel that they "agreed that a
  public reprimand is the  appropriate sanction" in the petitions pending
  before the Hearing Panel.

       On June 12, 1999, Respondent filed a partial waiver of Procedural
  Right and Reservation  of Partial Rights.

       OBC has advised the Hearing Panel that Respondent has followed through
  with each of  the representations contained in the joint filing, except for
  paragraph 6.  OBC is in the process of  following up with Respondent
  regarding paragraph 6 of the filing.

       The Hearing Panel, on August 31, 1999, accepted the June 10, 1999
  filing and issued its  report recommending a public reprimand.

       The Board hereby adopts the following facts and conclusions, and makes
  the following  recommendations:

Facts - PCB File No. 98.29

       a.	In 1993, and over the next three years, Respondent was
  retained by and  represented Ms. Filioe in an attempt to receive Social
  Security Disability Benefits.

       b.	Ms. Filioe's claim was denied, and it was decided to appeal
  the decision.

       c.	On December 5, 1996, the U.S. District Court for the District
  of Vermont denied  Ms. Filioe's appeal.

       d.	In February 1997, Respondent filed an appeal with the U.S.
  Court of Appeals for  the Second Circuit, which lacked various forms that
  were required by the Court's Civil Appeal  Management Plan.

       e.	The Court informed Respondent that the appeal would be
  dismissed if the forms  were not filed.  Respondent failed to file the
  forms.

       f.	On February 28, 1997, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals
  dismissed Ms. Filioe's  appeal due to failure to comply with the
  requirements of the Civil Appeal Management Plan.

       g.	Respondent did not tell Ms. Filioe that her appeal had been
  dismissed, nor did  Respondent return messages left by Ms. Filioe.

       h.	In July 1997, Ms. Filioe called the District Court for
  information on her case.  She  was told that the case was dismissed because
  the appeal did not include the required forms.

       i.	On September 20, 1997, Ms. Filioe filed a complaint with the
  Office of Bar  Counsel.

       j.	On September 30, 1997 and November 20, 1997, OBC asked the
  Respondent, in  writing, to respond to Ms. Filioe's allegations.

       k.	On December 15, 1997, OBC received Respondent's response. 
  The response did  not address the claim that Respondent neglected the
  appeal filed with the Second Circuit.

       l.	On January 12, 1998, January 23, 1998 and February 10, 1998,
  OBC asked the  Respondent, in writing, whether he had returned the file to
  Complainant.  No response was  received.

       m.	In December 1997, Complainant contacted OBC to advise that
  she had received  her file from Respondent.

Facts - PCB File No. 99.03

       a.	Respondent was retained to represent Gregory Wolf of
  Poultney, Vermont, in a  case involving one of Mr. Wolf's former tenants. 
  Gregory Wolf's father, Martin Wolf, is an  attorney in Connecticut.

       b.	Attorney Wolf advanced the requested $1,200.00 retainer to
  Respondent on behalf  of his son.  One-half of this retainer was to be
  refunded to Attorney Wolf upon agreement with  Respondent, if the case
  settled before trial, which it did.

       c.	In April 1998, Respondent sent Attorney Wolf a check in the
  amount of $500.00,  which was $100.00 short of the agreed-upon $600.00.

       d.	After being deposited, the check was returned to Attorney
  Wolf marked  "insufficient funds."

       e.	Respondent stated in a message to Attorney Wolf that he would
  send him the  $100.00 in addition to the $500.00 check already sent.  The
  check was returned marked  "insufficient funds."  Respondent did not make
  good on the money owed to the Wolfs.

       f.	On May 15, 1998, the OBC received an ethics complaint from
  Attorney Wolf.

       g.	By letters dated May 22, 1998, June 22, 1998 and July 21,
  1998, OBC asked  Respondent to answer the allegations in the complaint.  No
  answer was provided.

       h.	In a letter dated October 23, 1998, OBC asked Respondent to
  answer the  allegations in the complaint no later than November 9, 1998.

       i.	On November 6, 1998, Respondent left a message on OBC's voice
  mail stating  that he was placing his response in the mail that day.

       j.	On November 12, 1998, Respondent left a message on OBC's
  voice mail.  He  stated that his answer had not been mailed on November 6,
  but that he would be sending it  overnight mail that day.

       k.	By December 15, 1998, OBC had not received Respondent's
  answer.

       l.	By letter dated December 5, 1998, OBC asked Respondent to
  answer the  allegations in the complaint.  To date, no answer has been
  provided.

                                 CONCLUSION

       As to PCB File No. 98.29, it is found that Respondent violated DR
  6-101(A)(3) of the  Code of Professional Responsibility, which states that
  a lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter that  has been entrusted to him.

       As to PCB File No. 99.03, it is found that Respondent violated DR
  1-102(A)(7) of the  Code of Professional Responsibility.  Respondent
  reveals a disregard for his duty to the client,  which reflects on his
  fitness to practice law.  Respondent violated DR 9-102(B)(4), which 
  requires an attorney, upon request, to promptly pay to the client any funds
  in the lawyer's  possession that the client is entitled to receive. 
  Respondent also violated DR 1-102(A)(5) by  failing to respond to requests
  from bar counsel.

       The Board finds that a public reprimand is the appropriate sanction in
  these matters.   While a suspension might be an appropriate sanction, given
  the underlying facts, the Board is not  considering this sanction because
  Respondent has taken appropriate steps to address the issues  that brought
  about these violations.

       Dated at Montpelier, Vermont this    3rd      day of December, 1999.

PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT BOARD

     /s/
____________________________ 
Robert P. Keiner, Esq. Chair

     /s/	                         /s/
___________________________	____________________________
Steven A. Adler, Esq.	        John Barbour 

      /s/
___________________________	____________________________
Charles Cummings, Esq.	        Paul S. Ferber, Esq.	

     /s/	                         /s/
___________________________	____________________________
Michael Filipiak	        Barry E. Griffith, Esq.

     /s/	                          /s/
___________________________	____________________________
Robert F. O'Neill, Esq.	        Alan S. Rome, Esq.

      ABSENT
___________________________	____________________________
Mark L. Sperry, Esq.	        Ruth Stokes 

		                         /s/
___________________________	____________________________
Joan Wing, Esq. 	        Jane Woodruff, Esq.

___________________________	
Toby Young

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

FN1.  Two days after the Panel granted the Motion to Admit, Respondent, 
  on May 6, 1999, filed an  Answer.  In his Answer, Respondent
  admitted all of the material factual allegations of misconduct.  
  Respondent never filed a motion to reconsider the Panel's May 4, 1999
  ruling.