Case Title: Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Yoshino

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: hawaii

Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

Date: 2005-11-29T00:00:00Z

Document:
No. 26781
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI'

ee

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner

52 AON stig

ROY M. YOSHINO, Respondent

02:6 11

(ODC 97-230-5424, ODC 968-079-5570,
‘ODC 993-099-5929, ODC 00-387-6733) S|

ORDER OF SUSPENSION

(By: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, JJ., and
Circuit Judge Pollack, in place of Duffy, J., Recused)

 

upon consideration of (1) the Disciplinary Board's
April 15, 2005 report and recommendation for the suspension of

Respondent Roy M. Yoshino (Respondent Yoshino) from the practice

of law for a period of one year, (2) Petitioner Office of

Disciplinary Counsel's (Petitioner DC) June 2, 2005 opening
brief, (3) Respondent Yoshino’s August 12, 2005 answering brief,
(4) Petitioner ope’s Septenber 21, 2005 reply brief, and (5) the
record, we conclude that, in four disciplinary matters,
Petitioner 00C proved by clear and convincing evidence that

Respondent Yoshino violated several of the Hawai'i Rules of

Professional Conduct (HRPC) while Yoshino was representing

various clients. However, we reject the Disciplinary Board’s

recommendation that Respondent Yoshino receive a suspension for

| we suspend Respondent Yoshino from the

 

one year, and, inst

practice of law for a period of one year and one day.

atte
In ODC 97-230-5424, Respondent Yoshino

eeled a

 

client's bodily injury claim and underinsured motorist claim when

Yoshino did not have the client's authority to do so, and, thus,

Respondent Yoshino violated

HRPC Rule 1.2(a) (requiring a lawyer to abide by a
client's decision whether to accept an offer of
settlement of a matter); and

 

HREC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do 0
through the acts of another).

Respondent Yoshino used a client’s revoked power of attorney to

settle the client’s bodily injury claim and underinsured motorist

claim in violation of

HRPC Rule 1.2(a) (requiring a lawyer to abide by a
client's decisions concerning the objectives of
representation);

HRPC Rule 4.1(a) (prohibiting a lawyer from
knowingly making a false statement of material
fact or law to a third person in the lawyer's
course of representing @ client);

HRPC Rule 8.4(c) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for an attorney to engage
in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or
misrepresentation); and

HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).

Respondent Yoshino failed to comply with the client’s request

that Respondent Yoshino send a copy of the revoked power of

attorney to the client, and, thus, Respondent Yoshino violated
HRPC Rule 1.4(a) (requiring a lawyer to keep @
client reasonably informed about the status of a
matter and promptly comply with reasonable
requests for information); and

 

 

HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).

Respondent Yoshine deposited the client’s settlement checks into

his general business account, and, thus, Respondent Yoshino

commingled the client’s funds with Respondent Yoshino’s personal

funds in violation of

HREC Rule 1.15(a) (1) (requiring that a lawyer who
receives or handles client funds must maintain a
Client trust account, separate from any business
‘and personal accounts, into which all funds
entrusted to the lawyers care must be deposited);

HRPC Rule 1.15(c) (providing that @ lawyer in
possession of any funds belonging to a client,
Where such possession is incident to the lawyer's
practice of law, is a fiduciary and shall not
commingle such funds with his or her own or
misappropriate such funds to his or her own use
and benefit);

HRPC Rule 1.15(c) (requiring that funds belonging
in part to a client and in part presently or
potentially to the lawyer or law firm must be
Geposited into the client trust account);

HRPC Rule 1.18(d) (requiring that all funds
entrusted to a lawyer must be deposited intact
into a client trust account); and

RPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
{he rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).
In ODC 98-079-8570, Respondent Yoshino failed to
provide written fee agreements for seventeen clients whom
Respondent Yoshino represented on a contingent basis, and, thus,
Respondent Yoshino violated

+ HREC Rule 1.5(c) (requiring that contingent fee
agreements shall be in writing and shall state the
method by which the fee is to be determined,
including the percentage or percentages that shall
accrue to the lawyer in the event of settlement,
trial or appeal, litigation and other expenses to
be deducted from the recovery, and whether such
expenses are to be deducted before or after the
contingent fee is calculated); and

+ BRPC Rule €.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do s0, or do so,
‘through the acts of another).

Respondent Yoshino failed to provide written settlement
statements for at least three of the settling clients in
violation of

+ HREC Rule 1.5(c) (requiring that, upon the
conclusion of a contingent fee matter, the lawyer
shall provide the client with a written statement
stating the outcone of the matter and, if there is
‘a recovery, showing the remittance to the client
and the method of its determination); and

+ HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so,
‘through the acts of another).

Respondent Yoshino deposited the settlement checks for six of his
settling clients into Respondent Yoshino’s general business

account, and, thus, Respondent Yoshino commingled the clients’
funds with Respondent Yoshino’s personal funds in violation of

+ HREC Rule 1.15(a) (1) (requiring that a lawyer who
receives or handles client funds must maintain 2
client trust account, separate from any business
and personal accounts, into which all funds
entrusted to the lawyer's care must be deposited);

+ HREC Rule 1.15(c) (providing that a lawyer in
possession of any funds belonging to a client,
Where such possession is incident to the lawyer's
practice of law, is a fiduciary and shall not
commingle such funds with his or her own or
misappropriate such funds to his or her own use
and benefit);

+ BRPC Rule 1.15(c) (requiring that funds belonging
in part to a client and in part presently or
potentially to the lawyer or law firm must be
deposited into the client trust account);

 

+ HRPC Rule 2.15(d) (requiring that all funds
entrusted to 2 lawyer must be deposited intact
into a client trust account); and

+ HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).

In O0C 99-09-5929, Respondent Yoshino failed to notify
two clients of Respondent Yoshino’s withdrawal as their attorney,
land Respondent Yoshino failed to send the clients their records
in violation of

+ HRPC Rule 1.4(a) (requiring that 2 lawyer shall
keep a client reasonably informed about the status
of a matter and promptly comply with reasonably
requests for information) ;

+ HRPC Rule 1.16(d) (requiring that, upon
termination of representation, a lawyer shall take
steps to the extent reasonably practicable to
protect a client's interests, such as giving
reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for
employment of other counsel, surrendering papers

5
 

and property to which the client is entitled and
refunding any advance payment of fee that has not
been earned); and

 

HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so,
through the acts of another).

In ODC 00~387-6733, Respondent Yoshino deposited the

settlement funds for seven settling clients into Respondent

Yoshino’s general business account, and, thus, Respondent Yoshino

commingled the clients’ funds with Respondent Yoshino’ s personal.

funds in violation of

HRPC Rule 1.15(a) (1) (requiring that @ lawyer who
receives or handles client funds must maintain a
client trust account, separate from any business
and personal accounts, into which all funds
entrusted to the lawyer's care must be deposited);

HRPC Rule 1.15(c) (providing that 2 lawyer in
possession of any funds belonging to a client,
where such possession is incident to the lawyer's
practice of law, is @ fiduciary and shall not
conmingle such funds with his or her own or
misappropriate such funds to his or her own use
and benefit);

RPC Rule 1.15(c) (requiring that funds belonging
in part to 4 client and in part presently or
potentially to the lawyer or law firm must be
deposited into the client trust account);

RPC Rule 1.15(d) (requiring that all funds
entrusted to a lawyer must be deposited intact
into a client trust account); and

HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).
Respondent Yoshino failed to provide written agreements for five

clients whom Respondent Yoshino represented on a contingent fee

basis, and, thus, Respondent Yoshino violated

HRPC Rule 1.5(c) (requiring that contingent fee
agreements shall be in writing and shall state the
method by which the fee is to be determined,
including the percentage or percentages that shall
accrue to the lawyer in the event of settlement,
trial or appeal, litigation and other expenses to
be deducted from the recovery, and whether such
expenses are to be deducted before or after the
contingent fee is calculated); and

HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).

Respondent Yoshino failed to provide written settlement

statements for four of his settling clients in violation of

HREC Rule 1.5(c) (requiring that, upon the
conclusion of a contingent fee matter, the lawyer
shall provide the client with a written statement
stating the outcone of the matter and, if there is
a recovery, showing the remittance to the client
and the method of its determination); and

 

HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).

Respondent Yoshino failed to properly identify his general

business account in violation of

REC Rule 1.15(b) (requiring a lawyer to
prominently label each client trust account, as
well as deposit slips and checks drawn thereon, as
a “client trust account,” and requiring a lawyer
to prominently label each business account as a
“business account,” “office account,” or
appropriate business-type account); and

 

 

7
+ HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).

 

Respondent Yoshino falsely certified on his annual attorney
registration statements that he maintained his clients’ funds,
property, books and records in accordance with HRPC Rule 1.15 and
Rule 11 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai"t
(RSCH), and, thus, Respondent Yoshino violated
+ HREC Rule 8.4(c) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for an attorney to engage
in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or
misrepresentation); and
+ HRPC Rule 8.4(a) (providing that it is
professional misconduct for a lawyer to violate
the rules of professional conduct, knowingly
assist or induce another to do so, or do so
through the acts of another).
‘Therefore,
IT 18 HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Roy N. Yoshino
(attorney number 1419) is suspended from the practice of law in
Hawas's for a period of one (1) year and one (1) day, effective
thirty (30) days after entry of this order, as RSCH Rule 2.16(c)
provides. Respondent Yoshino shall comply with all requirements
of RSCH Rule 2.16, and Respondent Yoshino shall not resume the
practice law in the State of Hawai'i unless he successfully
petitions for reinstatement pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.17(c).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Roy M. Yoshino
(attorney number 1419) shall successfully complete, at his own

expense, the mandatory Hawai‘ Professionalism course (that is

8
conducted under the joint sponsorship of the Hawai‘i State Bar
and the Supreme Court of Hawai'i pursuant to RSCH Rule 1.14)
before Respondent Yoshino petitions for reinstatement.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai'i, November 29, 2005.

yre~
Pu BiLarisae

Riceetts SNe nee

fiche w- (i