Opinion ID: 2599479
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: a lawyer engages in a pattern of neglect with respect to client matters and causes serious or potentially serious injury to a client.

Text: 4.42 Suspension is generally appropriate when: (a) a lawyer knowingly fails to perform services for a client and causes injury or potential injury to a client; or (b) a lawyer engages in a pattern of neglect and causes injury or potential injury to a client. The hearing officer concluded that ABA Standard 4.41(c) (disbarment) did not apply because even though there are multiple instances of neglect of client matters by Mr. Anschell, this does not amount to a pattern of neglect. CP at 104. The hearing officer then applied ABA Standard 4.42(a) (suspension). [5] The Disciplinary Board disagreed, finding that a pattern of neglect was shown in this case, but chose to apply ABA Standard 4.42 because the pattern of misconduct is not sufficiently severe to justify disbarment. CP at 109. The Board's discussion of this issue is confusing. In paragraph six of the Board's conclusions it rejected the hearing officer's finding that Anschell's conduct did not amount to a pattern of neglect. In doing so, however, the Board relied on the hearing examiner's findings related to pattern of misconduct in paragraph 97. The Board then went on, in paragraph 7, to state that the pattern of misconduct is not sufficiently severe to justify disbarment. Suspension pursuant to ABA Standard 4.42 is the presumptive sanction. Initially, a pattern of misconduct is not relevant under ABA Standard 4.41 or 4.42; the inquiry is whether the conduct established a pattern of neglect. Further, application of the standards relating to neglect, 4.41(c) and 4.42(b), are not dependent on the severity of the pattern. Rather, the distinction between those standards is the level of seriousness of the injuries. If the injury is serious, disbarment is warranted, if not, suspension is the presumptive sanction. Based on the Board's erroneous conclusion that pattern of misconduct and pattern of neglect are interchangeable it is difficult to know whether the Board believed that the standard under 4.41(c) was satisfied. In this case, however, determining the existence of a pattern of neglect is unnecessary. The Board adopted all of the hearing officer's findings and conclusions other than those explicitly modified by its decision. In doing so, the Board agreed with the hearing officer that Anschell's conduct violated ABA Standard 4.42(a). The only distinction between 4.41(b) (disbarment) and 4.42(a) (suspension) is the level of actual or potential injury to a client. The Board did find that ABA Standard 4.41(c) (pattern of neglectdisbarment) was violated, which requires serious or potentially serious injury to a client. Since Anschell caused serious or potentially serious injury to his clients, the presumptive sanction, under the Board's analysis, should have been disbarment under 4.41(b), irrespective of the existence of a pattern of neglect.