Opinion ID: 6351456
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: By admission and stipulation:

Text: 1. Petitioner, whose principal office is located at [ ], Pa., is invested, pursuant to Rule 207 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement, with the power and the duty to investigate all matters involving alleged misconduct of an attorney admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to prosecute all disciplinary proceedings brought in accordance with the various provisions of the aforesaid rules. 2. Respondent, [ ], Esq., is an attorney admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, who has maintained offices in [ ] County, and whose residence is located at [ ]. 3. On or about May 16, 1975, [B] suffered personal injuries and property damage to her vehicle as a result of involvement in an automobile accident, in which the other vehicle involved was operated by [D], who was insured by Aetna Insurance. 4. Shortly thereafter, respondent, either personally, or through his agent, [C], undertook to represent [B] in regard to the matter: (a) Respondent or [C] eventually arranged for settlement of [B’s] claim in the total amount of $2,334.23, which included payment of approximately $109.23 for property damage (which amount she received about June 17, 1975), and $2,225 as settlement for her personal injuries; (b) On September 9, 1975, [B] signed a full and final release of [D], in consideration of current payment to her of $2,225; (c) On September 9, 1975, Aetna issued a draft for $2,225payable to “[B] & Attorney [respondent],” which [C] received not later than about September 12, 1975. 5. By a “settlement statement” which [B] signed on or about that date, she approved for distribution from the $2,225 currently received an amount of $778 for legal fees, $443.50 for “[A] Chiropratic” and sums of $38 and $2 for miscellaneous medical expenses, leaving a “net amount” due her of $963.50: (a) A copy of a bill from “[A] Chiropractic Offices” to [B] in amount of $443.50 dated August 22, 1975, and the original or a copy (showing signature) of the “settlement statement,” were placed in respondent’s case file on this matter by [C]; (b)The only money which [B] received from the $2,225 settlement then being paid was the sum of $963.50 6. At this time respondent maintained a so-called “Trustee Account” at Equibank, N.A., checks for which were imprinted “Trustee Account”, [respondent], [C]. 7. Prior to September 20, 1975, this account could be drawn upon either by respondent or [C]. 8. [C] was not a lawyer and had not attended law school. 9. Respondent was the subject of a previous disciplinary proceeding at no. 39 D.B. 77, relating in part to his activities in connection with [C] as a result of which proceeding he was subjected to discipline: (a) In connection with respondent’s activities with [C], it was found that he had violated D.R. 3-102(A) and D.R. 3-103(A), by sharing legal fees with a non-lawyer, and by forming a partnership with a non-lawyer, activities of which partnership included the practice of law; (b) Part of the integral findings in that proceeding were to the effect that in early 1975 respondent and [C] had opened a “Trustee” checking account and a “General” checking account, both for the use of the practice, which accounts were joint, one signature, with right of survivorship, which findings were never challenged by respondent; (c) The said “Trustee” account, identified therein as petitioner’s Exhibit 8, was the same account as the “Trustee” account identified above; (d) The “General” checking account, identified therein as Petitioner’s Exhibit 7, was a checking account in Equibank, N.A. 10. The Aetna settlement check for $2,225 was deposited in the “Trustee” account on September 12, 1975: (a) On that same date, [C] drew a check on the “Trustee” account for $778, payable to “[respondent], general account,” which was deposited the same day into the said “General Account;” (b) On the same day, [C] drew a check on the “Trustee” account for $963.50, payable to [B], annotated “Settlement on [D].” 11. [C] left his employment in connection with respondent not later than September 20, 1975. 12. On September 24, 1975, respondent caused control of the “Trustee” account to be transferred to himself and the authorized drawers thereon then became himself and/or [E] who later became respondent’s wife. 13. Similarly, not later than September 30,1975, respondent caused control of the “General” account to be transferred to himself, to the exclusion of [C]. 14. A periodic bank statement on the “Trustee” account, dated September 16,1975, showed the deposit thereto of the $2,225 Aetna settlement check, and the charge against the account on September 12 for the $778 check for legal fees. 15. The periodic statement for the “General” account dated September 30, 1975, showed thereon the deposit on September 12 of the $778 check for legal fees. 16. On or about October 2, 1975, Dr. [A] proprietor of “[A] Chiropractic Offices,” wrote and sent, and respondent received, a letter which referred to a prior mailing of a “final statement” to respondent on August 22, 1975, for professional services rendered by [A] to [B], noted that payment had not yet been made to [A] regarding the account, nor any reply made to that prior communication, and requested explanation as to why payment had not been made or if there were some reason for delay. 17. The periodic statement for the “Trustee” account dated October 20, 1975, addressed to “[respondent] or [E].” at the same street address as previous such statements, showed on its face a charge against that account on September 18, 1975, for the $963.50 settlement check issued to [B], and the said statement included therewith the cancelled check in that amount, which had been negotiated by [B]. 18. (a) On or shortly after October 20, 1975, respondent was aware that the said funds had been withheld and that Dr. [A] had made demand for the same; (b) As of October 20, 1975, there was a balance of $1,700.30 in the said “Trustee” account which had been the initial depository of the $2,225 current settlement, and which account must be considered to have held the residue of the settlement which was not disbursed; (c) Thereafter, respondent so used that account as to draw the balance available therein below the figure of $443.50 19. Not later than about June 15, 1977, respondent had personally acknowledged to Dr. [A] that he was personally responsible for the $443.50 in funds which had been withheld from [B] in regard to her settlement, and that he would personally remit that amount to [A] on account of [A’s] bill against [B].