Opinion ID: 1578886
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 12

Heading: counts seventeen and eighteen

Text: ¶ 32. The OLR complaint alleged, and Jaconi now stipulates, that on September 20, 2001, V.S. hired Jaconi to represent him in a small claims matter and paid Jaconi $200 toward the agreed upon $500 flat fee. Jaconi thereafter filed a small claims action on December 6, 2001, naming K Motors as the defendant. V.S subsequently notified Jaconi that K Motors had not been served with a small claims summons and complaint because that defendant had changed its name to Easy Auto Sales. ¶ 33. At the initial return date of December 26, 2001, Jaconi appeared in the small claims action; however, because an amended complaint was needed naming Easy Auto Sales as the defendant, an adjourned return date of January 14, 2002, was scheduled. After December 26, 2001, however, V.S. was unable to reach Jaconi despite his numerous attempts to do so by telephone and letter. Four subsequent return dates were adjourned because Jaconi failed to appear. ¶ 34. V.S. then sent a letter to Jaconi expressing displeasure about the quality of Jaconi's services and complaining that Jaconi had not returned his telephone calls and had failed to appear on the scheduled court dates. In that letter, V.S. Informed Jaconi that the next court date was April 10, 2002, and asked Jaconi to contact him before that date. Jaconi did not do so. On April 10, 2002, Jaconi appeared in the small claims matter. However, because he had not contacted V.S. prior to that return date, Jaconi was unaware that V.S. would be unable to appear at that date because of a work conflict. The small claims action was then dismissed on that date because of V.S.'s failure to appear. ¶ 35. Based on this admitted course of conduct regarding his representation of V.S., the OLR complaint charged Jaconi with an additional two counts of professional misconduct, to which he now stipulates: COUNT SEVENTEEN: By failing to appear at several court dates and by failing to file and serve necessary amended pleadings, Jaconi failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client, in violation of SCR 20:1.3. COUNT EIGHTEEN: By failing to respond to V.S.'s numerous telephone and written inquiries, Jaconi failed to keep a client Reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, in violation of SCR 20:1.4(a).