Opinion ID: 4547195
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Representation of John Mack

Text: Respondent represented Mr. Mack as successor counsel in a personal injury matter, in which Kaiser Permanente (“Kaiser”) informed respondent that it had a claim of $554 for medical services it provided to Mr. Mack. When the matter settled, respondent put the settlement funds in his trust account. On June 8, 2010, respondent disbursed payment to Mr. Mack and withheld $1,000, which he deposited in his trust account, to repay Kaiser. More than nine months later, on March 15, 2011, respondent sought Mr. Mack’s permission to repay Kaiser. However, respondent substantive law relating to alternative litigation financing arrangements was undeveloped and the application of ethical rules to those circumstances raises “weighty policy questions.” Because neither Bar Counsel nor respondent takes exception to that finding, we do not address or disturb it. See, e.g., In re Delaney, 697 A.2d 1212, 1214 (D.C. 1997) (noting that court’s review, when neither respondent nor Bar Counsel takes exception to a Board’s recommendation, is “especially deferential”). 4 did not write a check to Kaiser until May 6, 2011, and the check did not clear his account until May 23, 2011. During the intervening time, in April and May 2011, the balance of respondent’s trust account fell below $554. On May 11, 2011, respondent wrote a check for $2,737.23 from his trust account to pay his office rent. The bank rejected the check due to insufficient funds, causing his balance to go negative on May 12, before returning to $490.12.2 On May 12, respondent transferred $500 in personal funds to his trust account so that it would have sufficient funds for the check he had made to Kaiser to clear, which occurred on May 23, 2011. Respondent admits that he mismanaged his trust account and that he did not keep a ledger, accounting records, or similar documentation. Instead, respondent recorded funds in each of his client files with a “disbursement authorization, the settlement agreement, and any other related documents,” such as a settlement sheet. Respondent acknowledged that it would be “difficult” to trace client funds from his trust account. The “best way” to do so would be to find the settlement sheet in each client file, determine when the matter settled and disbursements had been made, and then track those transactions in the trust account’s bank records. In most instances, it was not possible to determine the amount of client funds in his trust 2 Before the Ad Hoc Hearing Committee (the “Hearing Committee”), respondent asserted that he mistakenly wrote his office rent check from his trust account, rather than his management account. 5 account or to compare that amount to the bank records. Respondent admitted that properly maintaining his trust account would have enabled him to maintain sufficient funds to pay Kaiser. Furthermore, respondent kept client records for only three years and not five; he was unaware that the ethics rules required five-year record keeping. From May 21, 2010 through May 22, 2015, an investigator hired by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel determined that respondent commingled approximately $40,000 in non-client funds with client funds in his trust account. Respondent admitted that he put personal and third-party checks into his trust account. During that period, respondent conducted at least forty-three personal and non-client transactions totaling approximately $100,000 using his trust account.