Opinion ID: 1487866
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: Sarah Smith

Text: Sarah Smith is the daughter of the Jamaican housekeeper and child care provider who worked in the Respondent's household for many years. Smith has always called the Respondent Uncle Joel. She called him Uncle Joel throughout his representation of her. Smith retained the Respondent to represent her concerning divorce and child custody and support. Smith's husband had recently returned from Iraq and had threatened to kill Smith on three occasions. Smith retained the Respondent in October 2003 and paid the firm $3,000 as a retainer fee. The divorce was uncontested. The matter did not involve any significant property division issues. It was necessary to seek Protection From Abuse order[s]. Smith was quite young and struggling financially; she had an abusive husband and a newborn son. The Respondent started by giving Smith a peck on the check, and occasionally hugging her. The Respondent's advances increased in frequency and he became more and more aggressive. He started scheduling meetings with Smith after hours. He kissed her on the mouth, groping her, touching and squeezing her bottom, and putting his tongue in her mouth. The first time he put his tongue in her mouth, he explained to her that it was just a friendly kiss and then proceeded to get on top of her and grope and squeeze her bottom. The Respondent referred to Smith's newborn son as a lucky boy because he was being breast fed. His comments and suggestions became more explicit. The Respondent would sit next to her on the couch and would be all over me. At the second PFA hearing, Smith was very pleased with the outcome. She was so happy that she went over to hug the Respondent. He pushed her away and said, Oh no, not here. Eventually, Smith insisted on meeting the Respondent during regular office hours. She recites two incidents that occurred during business hours. On one occasion, Smith and the Respondent were sitting on the couch in the Respondent's office. He was all over her and groping her. The second incident occurred on a day Smith was meeting with Ms. White to review documents in an upstairs conference room to prepare a financial document commonly referred to as the 52D. Smith describes it as a small conference room with a round table and two or three chairs. The Respondent came in and sat down, and asked Ms. White to go downstairs to get documents from the file. When Ms. White left the room and they were alone, the Respondent pressed Smith up against the conference room table, grabbed her head, and forced his tongue into her mouth. He was pushing his body up against her body, forcing himself. When he was done, he took her hand and forced her to touch him in his genital area (outside of his pants), and said, You see what you do to me. Smith was afraid to tell him to stop because whenever she resisted him, the Respondent would refuse to address the legal issues of her case. Smith was fairly desperate to retain custody of her son, and she felt that she needed the Respondent's assistance to accomplish this. She says that she tried to tell him no on numerous occasions but she came to feel that she had no choice. When she rebuffed him, the Respondent became aloof, would not focus on her case and acted as if he did not care about her case. Also, she felt he was powerful, that he knew all the judges and the lawyers and that he would retaliate against her. During a meeting in his office, Smith discussed her legal bills with the Respondent, expressing concern about owing so much money and being unable to pay the bill. The Respondent told Smith to have a seat on the couch. The Respondent sat down very close to her and placed his hand on her leg. Smith explained to the Respondent that she was at a disadvantage because she was poor and that her son was all she had. As he was sitting close and rubbing her thigh with his hand, the Respondent replied, We can work out the bill. Smith believes that the Respondent would have reduced or eliminated the bill if she had agreed to have sex with him. Smith states, [The Respondent's] advances made me feel cheap. Effective July 1, 2003, Rule 1.8(j) provides that [a] lawyer shall not have sexual relations with a client unless a consensual sexual relationship existed between them when the client-lawyer relationship commenced. By engaging in the physical conduct alleged herein with Smith during the course of his representation of her, the Respondent violated Rule 1.8(j). (Count 22)