Description
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
Running Head: LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY ISSUES
Student’s Name:
Institution’s Affiliation:
LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
2
Abernathy, Deborah L.
04/20/09
DC Nos. 07-0619, et al.
SB-09-0017-D
Acoording to the Supreme court of Arizon in the disciplinary commission numbers 07-0619, 07-1271, a
judgement was made to the effect that
1.
Deborah l. Abernathy, a member of the State Bar of Arizona, was to be suspended from the
practice of law for a period of ten months, effective thirty days from the date of the judgment and
order, for conduct in violation of her duties and obligations as a lawyer, as disclosed in the Disciplinary
Commission Report.
2.
Deborah l. Abernathy, was to be placed on probation for a period of two years upon
reinstatement with terms and conditions to include six additional CLE hours related to ethics and
participation in the State Bar's Law Office Management Assistance Program.
3.
Deborah l. Abernathy was to pay restitution in the following amounts to the following
individuals: $2,176.00 Total Edie Eisenschenk $2,500.00 Deborah L. Gallagher : $4,676.00
4.
The Respondent was also to comply with all the provisions of Rule 72, Rules of the Supreme
Court of Arizona, including, but not limited to, Rule 72(a), which required that Respondent notify all of
her clients, within ten days from that date, of her inability to represent them and that she should
promptly inform this Court of her compliance with this order as provided in Rule 72(e).
5.
IT was FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent shall be assessed the costs and expenses of the
disciplinary proceedings as provided in Rule 60(b).
What had Abernathy done to deserve such orders? Well, according to Lawyer regulation, Abernathy’
having been paid to represent a client in a dissolution, the representation terminated prior to the end of
the proceeding. Her client requested an itemized accounting. Ms Abertnathy failed to provide an
accounting or return her client file, and a charge was filed with the State Bar. Ms Abernathy failed to
completely respond to the state bars numerous requests for information regarding the matter, and a
LEADERSHIP AND DIVERSITY
3
complaint was filed. Ms Abernathy failed to fully cooperate with the requirements of the case
management order and failed to appear at hearing on the merits. According to Lawyer regulation,
Abernathy violated Rule 42, ARIZ.R.S.CT., ERsA 1.6 1,15and 8.1(b), and Rule 53(d) and (f), ARIZ.R.S.CT. in
short, Abernathy
•
Failure to competently and diligently represent clients.
•
failed to safeguard client property by entering into an improper fee agreement and
•
Failed to protect the clients’ interests upon termination of the representation.
According to the American Bar Association code of conduct rules, Abernathy broke the following rules,
➢ Competence, which states that a lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client.
Competent representation requires the legal knowledge, skill, thoroughness, and preparation
reasonably necessary for the representation. Abernathy as shown in the case above failed to
provide competent representation to her client.
➢
Scope of Representation and Allocation Of Authority Between Client And Lawyer.
Several items are highlighted in this representation to include the following.
a) that a lawyer shall abide by a client's decisions concerning the objectives of representation,
b) shall consult with the client as to the means by which they are to be pursued.
c) take such action on behalf of the client as is impliedly authorized to carry out the
representation.
d) abide by a client's decision whether to settle a matter. In a criminal case, the lawyer shall
abide by the client's decision, after consultation with the lawyer, as to a plea to ...