 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Dersham9/21/1999
STATE v. DERSHEM
BAR DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING
In these consolidated complaints, Oklahoma Bar Association charged Respondent with four counts of professional misconduct citing failure to competently and diligently represent three different clients, lack of communication with clients and failure to respond to investigation by the bar association. Respondent previously received a private reprimand in 1996 from the Professional Rules Commission. The Professional Responsibility Tribunal recommended Respondent receive a public censure in this matter, which was in accord with stipulations and an agreed recommendation for discipline entered into by Complainant and Respondent. Due to Respondent's repeated failure to respond to the bar association and the multiple client neglect, combined with previous discipline, Respondent is ordered suspended from the practice of law for a period of ninety days and to pay costs in accordance with Rule 6.1 of the RGDP.
RESPONDENT SUSPENDED FOR NINETY DAYS.
COSTS IMPOSED.
Oklahoma Bar Association disciplinary proceedings were brought against Respondent attorney, Michael Duane Dersham, Sr., in two complaints, collectively alleging four counts of professional misconduct. These complaints were consolidated before the Professional Responsibility Tribunal and are consolidated for purposes of this opinion.
Respondent testified at a deposition and at the hearing held before the Professional Responsibility Tribunal. In addition, Complainant and Respondent both entered into agreed stipulations of fact and law and an agreed recommendation for discipline.
Respondent, Dersham, stipulated that he is a member of the Oklahoma Bar Association and is licensed by the Supreme Court to practice law in the state of Oklahoma. Further, he was so licensed at the time of the incidents alleged in the complaints which resulted in these proceedings.
The Trial Panel reviewed the stipulations and the remaining record and approved the stipulations as well as the recommendation for discipline, which was public censure. Due to the repetitive nature of Respondent's client neglect, combined with Respondent's complete failure to respond timely to the bar association with regard to any of the complaints alleged, and the fact Respondent was previously disciplined with a private reprimand in 1996 from the Professional Rules Commission, we order instead that Respondent be suspended for a period of ninety (90) days.
Count 1 of the first complaint, OBAD 1313, involved Respondent's representation of client, Donna Robertson, in a wrongful termination of employment matter. Respondent was retained in the case in March 1995. According to the complaint and stipulations, Respondent did not contact Ms. Robertson for over one year after taking her case and never fully apprised her of the status of her case. Respondent claimed to have closed Ms. Robertson's file in August or September 1996 and claimed to have notified her of this development. Ms. Robertson denies receiving any such information from Respondent or his office.
With regard to his handling of Ms. Robertson's case, Respondent stipulated to violations of Rules 1.1 (competent representation), 1.3 (diligent representation), and 1.4 (communication/keeping client reasonably informed) of the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC). 5 O.S. Ch. 1, App. 3-A.
Respondent was sent two letters corresponding to Ms. Robertson's grievance, both required a response from Dersham. Respondent did not provide a response to either letter. A third, certified letter, was ultimately sent. Respondent did provide a response within the time limit
Page 1 2 3 4 Oklahoma Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|