Opinion ID: 1686050
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: Count III The Misuraca Matter

Text: In May 2003, respondent hired Guy Misuraca to perform a home inspection. The $225 check respondent issued to Mr. Misuraca was returned for insufficient funds. Respondent promised to issue a new check and to reimburse the bank service charges, but she failed to do so. [5] The ODC alleges that respondent's conduct violates the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct: Rules 8.4(a), 8.4(b) (commission of a criminal act reflecting adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer), and 8.4(c). DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS: Respondent was personally served with both sets of formal charges. She filed answers to the formal charges as well as memoranda in which she largely admitted the alleged misconduct. The matters then proceeded to formal hearings.