Opinion ID: 1345725
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: complaint two

Text: Before Committee 3A issued its report on the first complaint, the Bar filed a second complaint against Tarletz on 9 September 1987. This complaint was assigned to Hearing Committee 6I and alleged two counts. The Bar served the complaint personally upon Tarletz and she failed to answer within the appropriate time period. The Bar then served Tarletz with a notice of failure to answer. On 20 November 1987, the Bar hired a private process server to serve personal notice on Tarletz at her residence. She answered the door, but identified herself to the process server as Denise Bargely (Tarletz's secretary). The Committee then filed a notice of complaint deemed admitted due to Tarletz's failure to answer. Rule 53(c)(1), Sup.Ct. Rules. A hearing before Committee 6I was held on 8 February 1988. Again, after proper notice, Tarletz failed to appear. The Committee made the following findings of fact and conclusions of law with respect to this second complaint. Count One. In September 1986, Charles and Nancy Barringer retained Tarletz to file bankruptcy petitions on their behalf. The Barringers paid Tarletz a $250 retainer fee and a $60 filing fee. The Barringers signed all paperwork necessary for the petition on 13 September 1986. After several inquiries by the Barringer's, Tarletz finally filed the papers along with a Chapter 7 petition on 22 October 1986. On the same day, she sought permission from the bankruptcy court to delay paying the $60 filing fee for one week. In the Application to Pay Filing Fee in Installments in bankruptcy court, Tarletz indicated she received no compensation in this matter and signed Nancy Barringer's name to the application. The Barringers did not know Tarletz failed to use their $60 for the filing fee nor did they know she had signed Mrs. Barringer's name on the application. The Barringers never authorized Tarletz to sign their names. After discovering Tarletz was paid the filing fee and that Nancy Barringer's signatures on two separate papers were different, the bankruptcy judge ordered Tarletz and the Barringers to appear at a hearing on 5 December 1986 to consider who was responsible for false information on the application. Tarletz did not appear at that hearing. Committee 6I found that Tarletz's conduct violated the following rules: ER 3.3. Candor Toward the Tribunal (a) A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal ... ER 3.4. Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel A lawyer shall not: