Opinion ID: 2777288
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Count 4 – The Ashby Complaint

Text: Jeanette Renee Ashby filed a complaint against Mr. Rossi on June 7, 2012. Ms. Ashby stated that she retained Mr. Rossi to represent her son who had been charged with DUI second offense, possession with intent to distribute, and malicious battery and assault. Ms. Ashby claimed that she paid Mr. Rossi a $1,500.00 retainer fee. Ms. Ashby’s complaint states that Mr. Rossi failed to attend her son’s DUI second offense hearing and that her son had to represent himself at this hearing. The complaint further states that Ms. Ashby had difficulty contacting Mr. Rossi and that she eventually had to hire a different lawyer to represent her son. The complaint concludes with Ms. Ashby asking for a refund of the $1,500.00 she paid to Mr. Rossi. The ODC forwarded Ms. Ashby’s complaint to Mr. Rossi and requested a response. Mr. Rossi responded to the allegations, stating that he did not receive notice of the DUI hearing, but asserted that the charge was resolved at a later hearing that he had 8 While Mr. Rossi was initially given an admonishment in the Edwards complaint, the complaint was subsequently reopened after Mr. Rossi failed to follow the directive of the Investigative Panel to report to the Lawyer Assistance Program (see footnote 7, supra). 8 attended. Mr. Rossi also stated that he worked approximately 20.5 hours on the Ashby case. Ms. Ashby responded to Mr. Rossi’s reply and reiterated her original allegations. She also informed the ODC that she had participated in a fee dispute mediation in which Mr. Rossi agreed to refund $300.00 to her. After receiving this reply from Ms. Ashby, the ODC wrote to Mr. Rossi, asking him if he had refunded $300.00 to Ms. Ashby and if so, asking why he agreed to this refund. Mr. Rossi failed to respond to the ODC’s request. The ODC sent a second letter to Mr. Rossi inquiring about the $300.00 refund. Once again, Mr. Rossi failed to respond to the ODC’s request. Because of his failure to respond to the ODC’s requests, the Board found that Mr. Rossi violated Rule 8.1(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (see footnote 6, supra).