Court Opinion

ID: 9786281
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 23:52:26.627416+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:36:43.802060
License: Public Domain

MATTHEWS, Chief Justice,
dissenting as to sanctions.
I agree with the opinion of the court that Friedman knowingly and intentionally misapplied trust funds and that in so doing he engaged in serious criminal conduct. But for the reasons that follow, I would impose a period of suspension of four years.
The ABA Standards generally call for disbarment in a case like this.1 But these standards are only guidelines and in deciding the question of what sanction was appropriate the disciplinary board paid particular attention to this court's case of In re Mann.2 In Mann a majority of this court imposed a three-year suspension on a defalceating lawyer. The board in the present case found that Friedman's conduct was "overall, more reprehensible than ... Mann's," and so imposed a four-year period of suspension.
I agree with the board that Friedman's conduct is worse than Mann's in several re.spects. Friedman converted more client funds, as much as $72,000 at one point, whereas Mann's conversion was only a little more than $2,000.3 The duration of Friedman's misappropriation lasted more than a year, whereas the duration of Mann's conversion was less than a month.4 Mann reported his breach voluntarily soon after it occurred and fully cooperated with the bar.5 Friedman, by contrast, never reported his breaches and did not tell the truth concerning them.
Considering Mann as the most directly applicable precedent, I would accept the disciplinary board's recommendation and suspend Friedman for four years.

. See ABA Standards § 4.11 and § 5.11, set out in the opinion of the court at 631, footnotes 43 and 46.

. 853 P.2d 1115 (Alaska 1993).

. See id. at 1116.

. See id.

. See id.