Opinion ID: 1179901
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Willingness to Pay Restitution

Text: Evidence of an applicant's attempts to compensate people who were injured by the applicant's misconduct may affect our determination of whether the applicant has reformed his or her character. See In re Graham, 299 Or. at 520-21, 703 P.2d 970 (denying reinstatement, because [t]he primary deficiency in [the] applicant's rehabilitation is his apparent lack of interest in informing himself of what money is owed to former clients and in making restitution to those former clients). As previously noted, applicant paid, settled, or compromised all claims brought against him due to his misconduct. He also voluntarily settled his liability with the FDIC, using his own funds, before the FDIC filed an action against the parties responsible for the failure of Columbia Pacific. Finally, applicant cooperated with the FDIC and facilitated the FDIC's final settlement with all involved parties. The Bar argues that applicant still has not made full restitution, because applicant did not affirmatively seek out other victims who did not make claims against him personally in order to apologize and to compensate those victims for their losses. Those facts are true, and we acknowledge that those actions would make a stronger case for applicant's willingness to pay restitution. However, we view the record as a whole and conclude that applicant's failure to take those steps is not the result of an unwillingness to pay restitution for his wrongs, or of an unreformed, selfish moral character. Moreover, the evidence presented at the reinstatement hearing demonstrates that the purpose of the final FDIC settlement was to satisfy all actual and potential claims arising from the failure of Columbia Pacific and that applicant's purpose in fully cooperating with the FDIC was to facilitate satisfaction of those claims. The evidence also demonstrates that the final FDIC settlement achieved the goal of satisfying all actual and potential claims; after the final settlement distributions, a residue of approximately $1 million in insurance proceeds remained. By virtue of his voluntary and forthright participation in the FDIC settlement, then, applicant did demonstrate a willingness to further the principle that all involved parties receive restitution.