Opinion ID: 2320381
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Reinstatement with Probationary Conditions

Text: We have reviewed the Panel's Report and Recommendation carefully, as well as the ODC's objections thereto. We agree with the Panel's factual findings and its recommendation that Sullivan be reinstated as an active member of the Delaware Bar. We also agree with the ODC, however, that Sullivan's reinstatement should be subject to a three year period of probation with all of the proposed conditions, including the conditions of malpractice insurance and Sullivan's formal agreement to repay in full the $76,000 debt to Mr. Smith. The primary goal of the lawyer disciplinary system is to protect the public. [6] Although legal malpractice insurance is not mandatory for all members of the Delaware Bar, [7] there is precedent in this jurisdiction [8] and other jurisdictions [9] to require a lawyer, in an appropriate case, to have malpractice insurance. We commend Sullivan for his efforts at treatment for the issues that precipitated his previous misconduct, and we accept his doctor's opinion that future professional misconduct is unlikely as long as Sullivan remains in active treatment. Nonetheless, we conclude that it would be a breach of our duty to the public if we were to permit a lawyer with Sullivan's history of malpractice to be reinstated as an active member of the Bar without adequate malpractice insurance coverage. Moreover, given Sullivan's earlier agreement that Smith's debt would not be dischargeable in bankruptcy, we find it entirely appropriate to require Sullivan, as a condition of his reinstatement, to acknowledge his debt to Smith in writing and to make appropriate payments toward this debt.