Case Title: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Baker

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2006-07-24T00:00:00Z

Document:
Wo. 26392

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAMAT’ 8

 

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,

EDWIN L. BAKER, Respondent.

 

(ove 02-248-7446, 03-160-7760, 03-280-7880, 04-126-£106)

‘ORDER OF SUSPENSION
(By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, JJ.)

upon consideration of the Disciplinary Board’s Report
and Reconmendation for the Suspension of Edwin L. Baker from the
Practice of Law for a Period of 18 Months, the exhibits thereto,
and the record, it appears that Respondent Edwin L. Baker failed
to provide competent representation; failed to act with
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing his clients,
failed to promptly deliver to the client, as requested by the
client, properties in his possession which the client was
entitled to receive; failed to take steps to the extent
reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon
termination of representation: failed to make reasonable efforts
to expedite litigation consistent with the legitimate interests
of the client; knowingly discbeyed an obligation under the rules
of a tribunal; failed to make reasonable efforts to ensure that a
nonlawyer’s conduct was compatible with the professional
obligations of the lawyer; knowingly failed to respond to a
lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority: and
failed to cooperate during the course of ethics investigations in
violation of Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.19(f) (4), 1.26, 3.2, 3-4(e),
5.3(b), 8.1(b), 8.4(a}, and 6.4(d) of the Hawai'l Rules of

qa
Proféssional Conduct. It further appears, in aggravation, there
were multiple acts of unethical behavior and Respondent Baker has
substantial experience in the practice of law. In mitigation,
there is an absence of a selfish motive, and the presence of
personal and emotional problems and remorse. It finally appears
that Respondent Baker has been suspended, pursuant to Rule 2.12A
of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai'i
(ORSCH”), since April 19, 2004, Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Baker is suspended
from the practice of law in this jurisdiction for a period of
eighteen (18) months, effective upon entry of this order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Baker shall, as a
condition of his reinstatement, take and complete the Practicisig
Attorneys Liability Management Society's practice management/law
office audit program at his own expense, and reimburse the
Disciplinary Board for the costs associated with this proceeding,
ag determined by this court after timely submission of a bill of
costs.

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Respondent Baker shall,
within ten (10) days after the effective date of the suspension
order, file with this court an affidavit in full compliance with
RSCH 2.16(d)

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, July 24, 2006.

To
SOR arses

 

Gorm: Padin