Opinion ID: 1758765
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Chickett Matter

Text: In 1991, Ray drafted a family trust agreement for Lucy Chickett and her late husband. Then, in 1995, Ray assisted Chickett in bringing an automobile accident claim by writing a letter to a doctor that stated: We are assisting and representing Lucy Chickett in her claim for injuries she sustained in [an] automobile accident   . Ray sought a report from the doctor for use in reaching a settlement with the insurance company. In his response, the doctor addressed Ray as Harry N. Ray, Attorney at Law, and Ray did not correct the doctor's misunderstanding of his status. Ray then referred Chickett's case to an attorney who negotiated with the insurer while Ray continued to work with Chickett. That attorney eventually settled the case and charged Chickett one-third of the settlement proceeds, one-third of which he, in turn, paid to Ray. In November 1998, Chickett requested her file from Ray. Ray did not respond to that request. In April 1999, Chickett's nieces, acting on her behalf under a power of attorney that Ray drafted while under suspension, again requested Chickett's file by writing Ray a letter and asking that he send Chickett's file to her attorney. Ray did not immediately respond. At the disciplinary hearing in this matter, Ray stated that he did not respond to Chickett's written request because she subsequently told him that she did not want the file. In his answer to the Director's supplementary petition, Ray further stated that he did not immediately respond to Chickett's nieces following the second request because he repeatedly attempted to call Chickett's attorney to tell him that he only had tax returns for Chickett, but could not reach him. When Ray finally reached the attorney, Ray delivered Chickett's file. In June 1999, the Director sent a Notice of Investigation to Ray regarding the Chickett matter and requested a response. Ray did not respond to that letter or to a subsequent identical request.