Opinion ID: 2096988
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Count 2: Former SCR 20:1.4(a); [2] Communication.

Text: ¶ 10 The referee found Attorney Nunnery had no contact with Mr. and Mrs. D. between mid-2002 and February 2005 on their real estate discrimination/denial of credit claims. Mrs. D. testified at length of her frustration when leaving messages at Attorney Nunnery's office and he would not return her calls. He did not advise Mr. and Mrs. D that one of the parties had been dismissed from the suit. The referee found credible Mrs. D.'s testimony that Attorney Nunnery had never explained the reasons for his conclusion that no viable claim existed. ¶ 11 In addition, Attorney Nunnery did not file a lawsuit against the bank. Therefore, the referee concluded Attorney Nunnery made a misleading statement in his February 9, 2005, letter to his clients. Attorney Nunnery indicated he had included the bank in the lawsuit he filed. [3] The referee concluded the evidence disclosed Attorney Nunnery failed to keep Mr. and Mrs. D. reasonably informed, thus supporting Count 2.