Title: In re Vesely
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: S47964
State: Oregon
Issuer: Oregon Supreme Court
Date: June 1, 2001

Filed: June 1, 2001
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON
In Re Complaint as to the Conduct of
IVAN J. VESELY,
Accused.
(OSB 97-101, 97-102, 98-105, 98-163, 99-68, 00-56, 00-57, 00-58,
00-71, 00-72; SC S47964)
	En Banc
	On review of the decision of a trial panel of the
Disciplinary Board.
	Submitted on the record April 30, 2001.
	Mary A. Cooper, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, Lake Oswego,
filed the brief for the Oregon State Bar.
	No appearance contra.
	PER CURIAM
	The accused is disbarred.
		PER CURIAM
		In this lawyer discipline proceeding, the Oregon State
Bar (Bar) alleged that the accused violated DR 1-102(A)(2)
(engaging in criminal conduct that reflects adversely on lawyer's
honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness to practice law) (two
counts); DR 1-102(A)(3) (engaging in conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation) (two counts); DR
1-102(A)(4) (engaging in conduct prejudicial to administration of
justice) (two counts); DR 1-103(C) (failing to cooperate with
disciplinary investigation) (nine counts); DR 2-110(A)(2)
(withdrawing from representation without taking reasonable steps
to avoid foreseeable prejudice to client); DR 5-105(E)
(representing multiple current clients with conflicting
interests); DR 6-101(B) (neglecting legal matter) (four counts);
DR 7-102(A)(7) (counseling or assisting client in conduct lawyer
knows to be illegal or fraudulent); DR 7-106(A) (disregarding or
advising client to disregard rulings of tribunal) (two counts);
DR 9-101(C)(3) (failing to account for client funds) (two
counts); DR 9-101(C)(4) (failing to deliver client property
promptly) (three counts); ORS 9.527(1) (committing act or course
of conduct that, if member were applying for admission, should
cause application to be denied) (two counts); and ORS 9.527(3)
(willfully disobeying court order) (two counts).  
		The accused did not file an answer to the Bar's second
amended formal complaint within the time allowed, and a trial
panel of the Disciplinary Board entered an order of default.  The
accused did not participate in the trial panel's sanctions
hearing. (1)  After the sanctions hearing, the trial panel concluded
that the accused intentionally and knowingly had committed the
alleged violations and determined that the appropriate sanction
was disbarment.
		A detailed discussion of the accused's multiple acts of
misconduct would not benefit the public or the bar.  On de novo
review, we adopt the decision of the trial panel without opinion,
under BR 10.6. (2)
		The accused is disbarred.
1. 	This court automatically reviews the trial panel's
decision under BR 10.1 (requiring Supreme Court review if trial
panel imposes suspension for longer than six months or disbars
accused lawyer).

2. 	BR 10.6 provides in part:
"The court shall consider each matter de novo upon
the record and may adopt, modify or reject the decision
of the trial panel * * * in whole or in part and
thereupon enter an appropriate order.  If the court's
order adopts the decision of the trial panel * * *
without opinion, the opinion of the trial panel * * *
shall stand as a statement of the decision of the court
in the matter but not as the opinion of the court."