Title: STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. SPADAFORA
Citation: 1998 OK 40, 69OBJ1792, 960 P.2d 365
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: May 12, 1998

STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. SPADAFORA Annotate this Case STATE ex rel. OKLAHOMA BAR ASSOCIATION v. SPADAFORA 1998 OK 40 960 P.2d 365 69 OBJ 1792 Case Number: SCBD 4339 Decided: 05/12/1998 Mandate Issued: 06/09/1998 Supreme Court of Oklahoma STATE OF OKLAHOMA ex rel. Oklahoma Bar Association, Complainant, vs. EMIL VIRGIL SPADAFORA, JR., Respondent. [960 P.2d 366] RULE 8 APPLICATION APPLICATION APPROVED. RESPONDENT'S NAME STRICKEN FROM THE ROLL OF ATORNEYS. Janis Hubbard, Assistant General Counsel, Oklahoma Bar Association, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, for Oklahoma Bar Association; Emil V. (E.V.) Spadafora, Jr., Pro Se. WATT, J. ¶1 Upon the filing of seven (7) grievances to the Office of the General Counsel of the Oklahoma Bar Association, Respondent, Emil V. (E.V.) Spadafora, Jr., has tendered his resignation from membership in the OBA pending disciplinary proceedings. The OBA has filed an application for approval of Respondent's resignation. Upon consideration of the matter, we find: (a) A grievance (DC 96-428) was filed with the Office of the General Counsel on December 30, 1996, by Liem Van Tong which alleged he retained E.V. Spadafora for a fee of $2,500.00 to represent him as a defendant in a business trademark infringement lawsuit, Spadafora did not represent him, and a default judgment was taken against Tong. Tong also alleges Spadafora presented three personal checks for cash with face values totaling $450.00 at a business owned and operated by Tong, and the checks were not honored by the bank upon which they were drawn. (b) A grievance (DC 97-15) was filed with the Office of the General Counsel on January 13, 1997, by Michael Gomez which alleged E.V. Spadafora was retained for a fee of $900.00 to compel Gomez's ex-wife to accept $2,000.00, the amount of a judgment lien arising from the divorce. The $2,000.00 was to be held in trust until the matter was resolved. The complaint alleged Spadafora has not done the work for which he was retained, he won't account for the [960 P.2d 367] money he was to hold in trust, and Gomez can't contact him. The Office of the General Counsel has been advised criminal charges are pending in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Case No. F-98-1513, in connection with a complaint from Gomez. (c) A grievance (DC 97-426) was filed with the Office of the General Counsel on November 12, 1997, by Glenda Duncan which alleged E.V. Spadafora was retained for a fee of $1,600.00 in August, 1989, to represent the Personal Representative in the estate of Gary Michael Forga. Eight years has lapsed apparently with little work being done in the probate and Spadafora has failed to communicate with the personal representative. On September 7, 1997, the personal representative met with Spadafora who promised to conclude the probate within a month. There has been no further action in the probate and Spadafora has not communicated with the Personal Representative. Spadafora has not responded to a request for him to withdraw and refund the fees. No response to this grievance has been filed with the Office of the General Counsel, therefore, the additional allegation of a violation of Rule 5.2, RGDP, is to be considered. (d) A grievance (DC 97-454) was filed with the Office of the General Counsel on December 11, 1997, by April Lynn Chapa which alleged E.V. Spadafora was retained for a fee of $450.00 on July 29, 1997, to represent Chapa in a paternity suit. Chapa alleged that despite her efforts to communicate, Spadafora has not told her the status of the case, he is never in his office, and will not return telephone calls to Chapa. (e) A grievance (DC 98-1) was filed with the Office of the General Counsel on January 20, 1998, by Pauline Sperry which alleged E.V. Spadafora was retained for a fee of $1,125.00 to represent Sperry in her attempts to get custody of her grandchildren when the parents of the children were charged with murder. Spadafora represented Sperry at two hearings but has done nothing further, will not communicate, has left his office, and will not turn over the file to the successor attorney hired by Sperry. (f) A grievance (DC 98-54) was filed with the Office of the General Counsel on March 31, 1998, by Susan Hood which alleged she retained E.V. Spadafora for a fee of $1,500.00 to represent her as a plaintiff in a Title 7 lawsuit filed in the Western District of Oklahoma. Hood alleged Spadafora took no action in this matter and allowed a default judgment to be entered in favor of two defendants. (g) A grievance (DC 98-80) was filed by the General Counsel on April 13, 1998, based on information received from the Oklahoma City Police Department White Collar Crime Unit. This grievance alleges E.V. Spadafora in his representation of Fernando Corrales, presented a certified copy of a plea of guilty and summary of facts agreement filed in the Oklahoma County Court Clerk's office April 23, 1997, to an Assistant District Attorney. On page 2 of the 8 page document under §19 are the words "No Rev of Def". Spadafora maintained that the deferred sentence in the previous matter could not be revoked. Based on an investigation it was determined the words above quoted were not on the original document as microfilmed when filed. A forensic document examiner determined the words were added probably by the same hand as prepared the remainder of the document. That person was E.V. Spadafora. ¶2 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED ¶3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ¶4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ¶5 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ¶6 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ¶7 ALL JUSTICES CONCUR.