Opinion ID: 1215810
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: SEVENTH CAUSE OF COMPLAINT (Failure to cooperate with Bar)

Text: Ernest G. Moore filed a complaint against the accused with the General Counsel of the Bar on June 4, 1984. By letter dated June 7, 1984, the General Counsel requested the accused to respond to Moore's complaint by June 27, 1984. The accused did not respond. On July 9, 1984, the accused requested an extension of time from the General Counsel to respond to Moore's complaint. After receiving the request for an extension of time from the accused, the General Counsel was informed by Moore that he (Moore) had further information to furnish. By letter dated July 10, 1984, the General Counsel advised the accused that he was being granted an extension of time of 21 days from when Moore's letter would be received and forwarded to the accused. Moore's letter was received by the General Counsel on September 17, 1984. A copy of the Moore letter and a letter dated September 19, 1984, was sent to the accused by the General Counsel, requesting that the accused respond on or before October 11, 1983. The accused did not respond. On October 15, 1984, the General Counsel referred the matter to the Multnomah County LPRC for investigation. By letter dated November 8, 1984, Multnomah County LPRC member Jane E. Angus asked the accused for a written explanation and response to Moore's complaint by November 29, 1984. The accused talked to Angus twice prior to November 29, 1984, stating he would respond to the request. Approximately two weeks after November 29, 1984, the accused contacted Angus and promised immediate preparation and delivery of a response. As of January 30, 1985, the accused had not furnished the requested written response. By letter dated January 30, 1985, Angus advised the accused that, if his response was not received by February 8, 1985, the matter would be presented to the Multnomah County LPRC for further action. On February 8, 1985, the accused advised Angus that the requested response was not yet prepared but would be delivered by February 12, 1985. On February 11, 1985, the accused delivered the requested response to Angus. The Trial Panel concluded and this court concludes that the accused is guilty of violating the standard of professional conduct of former DR 1-103(C), in that he did not respond to the reasonable requests of the General Counsel and the Multnomah County LPRC.