Title: In re Barrett
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: S47788
State: Oregon
Issuer: Oregon Supreme Court
Date: August 16, 2001

Filed: August 16, 2001
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

In re:  Complaint as to the Conduct of
MICHAEL T. BARRETT,
Accused.
(OSB 98-48; SC S47788)

	On review of the decision of a trial panel of the
Disciplinary Board.
	Argued and submitted June 19, 2001.
	Michael T. Barrett, Salem, filed the briefs and argued the
cause in propria persona.
	Chris L. Mullman, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel, Lake
Oswego, filed the brief and argued the cause for the Oregon State 
Bar.
	Before Carson, C.J., and Gillette, Durham, Leeson, Riggs,
and De Muniz, JJ.
	PER CURIAM
	The accused is disbarred, effective 60 days from the date of
the filing of this decision.
		PER CURIAM
		In this lawyer disciplinary proceeding, the Oregon
State Bar (Bar) brought three causes of complaint.  The first
cause of complaint alleges that the accused withdrew an unearned
fee from his lawyer trust account and falsely informed his
clients that he had performed certain work, thereby violating
Code of Professional Responsibility Disciplinary Rule (DR) 1-102(A)(3) (engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit, or misrepresentation); DR 6-101(B) (neglecting legal
matter); DR 7-101(A)(2) (failing to carry out employment
contract); and DR 7-102(A)(5) (knowingly making false statement
of fact).  The second cause of complaint alleges that the accused
failed to give an accounting or deliver client records, and made
misrepresentations in those respects, thereby violating DR 1-102(A)(3); DR 6-101(B); DR 9-101(C)(2) (failing to preserve
client property); DR 9-101(C)(3) (failing to account for client
funds); and DR 9-101(C)(4) (failing to deliver client property). 
The third cause of complaint alleges that the accused failed to
cooperate with the Bar in its investigation of the foregoing
matters, thereby violating DR 1-103(C) (failing to cooperate with
disciplinary investigation) and DR 9-101(C)(2).  A trial panel of
the Disciplinary Board found that the accused had committed the
misconduct alleged, except as to DR 7-101(A)(2) (in first cause),
DR 6-101(B) and DR 9-101(C)(2) (in second cause), and DR 9-101(C)(2) (in third cause).  The trial panel concluded that
disbarment was the appropriate sanction.
		Review by this court is automatic.  ORS 9.536(2); Bar
Rules of Procedure (BR) 10.1.  We review de novo.  ORS 9.536(3);
BR 10.6.  The record establishes clearly and convincingly that
the accused committed the misconduct alleged, and that the
accused's misconduct warrants disbarment.  A discussion of the
facts and circumstances attendant to this proceeding would not
advance the interests of the public, bench, or bar.  
		As did the trial panel, we conclude that the accused
violated DR 1-102(A)(3) (two violations), DR 6-101(B), DR 7-102(A)(5), DR 9-101(C)(3), DR 9-101(C)(4), and DR 1-103(C), and
that the accused should be disbarred.
		The accused is disbarred, effective 60 days from the
date of the filing of this decision.