Opinion ID: 1566350
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Count IIThe Heath Matter

Text: In July 2001, Amy Heath retained respondent to handle a medical malpractice claim. In August 2001, respondent requested the appointment of a medical review panel. In attempting to locate an expert witness to support the malpractice claim, respondent spoke briefly to one other attorney and spoke to only one physician, who reviewed only part of the medical records. In June 2003, the medical review panel rendered an opinion adverse to Ms. Heath's claim. Respondent sent Ms. Heath a copy of the opinion on July 11, 2003. In September 2003, respondent filed a petition for damages on Ms. Heath's behalf with the Fourth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Ouachita. Thereafter, respondent failed to respond to the defendants' discovery requests. Motions for summary judgment on behalf of most of the defendants were granted in open court on April 5, 2005. [2] The related judgment was signed on April 19, 2005. A joint motion dismissing the remaining defendant, [3] which respondent signed, was granted on July 24, 2006. In May 2005, respondent mailed a copy of the April 2005 judgment to Ms. Heath and informed her he was unable to find a doctor to testify that malpractice occurred. Ms. Heath requested her file, but respondent did not send it to her until October 2006, more than one year after summary judgment was granted and after she filed a disciplinary complaint against him. Although respondent was in contact with Ms. Heath during the litigation, he failed to properly and accurately advise her of the status of the case. The ODC alleged respondent's conduct violated the following provisions of the Rules of Professional Conduct: Rules 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(d) (obligations upon termination of the representation), and 8.4(c). [4] Respondent stipulated that he violated the Rules of Professional Conduct as alleged.