 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
In re Discipline of Tanner8/17/2000
ORDER OF SUSPENSION AND PUBLIC REPRIMAND
This is an appeal from a decision of a hearing panel of the Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board. The panel found that attorney Mont E. Tanner had violated SCR 121 (confidentiality), SCR 157 (conflict of interest: general rule), SCR 170 (meritorious claims), SCR 172 (candor toward a tribunal), and SCR 203(3)(misconduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation). The panel recommended that Tanner receive a public reprimand and a 90-day suspension. The panel further recommended that the suspension be stayed and Tanner be placed on probation for one year, upon the following conditions: (1) that Tanner pay the costs of the proceeding, (2) that Tanner take and pass the MPRE, (3) that Tanner's practice be monitored by a mentor during the probationary period, and (4) that Tanner attend the next Bridge the Gap program offered by the state bar.
Although the recommendations of the disciplinary panel are persuasive, this court is not bound by the panel's findings and recommendation, and must examine the record anew and exercise independent judgment. See In re Kenick, 100 Nev. 273, 680 P.2d 972 (1984). Ethical violations must be proven by clear and convincing evidence, which this court has described as evidence which "`need not possess such a degree of force as to be irresistible, but there must be evidence of tangible facts from which a legitimate inference . . . may be drawn.'" In re Stuhff, 108 Nev. 629, 635, 837 P.2d 853, 856 (1992) (quoting Gruber v. Baker, 20 Nev. 453, 477, 23 P. 858, 865 (1890)).
We conclude that clear and convincing evidence supports the panel's finding that Tanner violated SCR 121, SCR 157, SCR 170, SCR 172 and SCR 203(3). We further conclude that the discipline recommended by the panel is appropriate. Accordingly, Tanner shall be suspended for a period of ninety (90) days. The suspension shall be stayed, and Tanner shall be placed on probation for a period of one year, upon the following conditions: (1) Tanner shall pay the costs of this disciplinary proceeding within thirty (30) days of the date of this order; (2) Tanner shall take and pass the MPRE during the one-year probation period; (3) Tanner's practice shall be monitored during the one-year probation period by a mentor who shall be selected by the state bar, and who shall file quarterly progress reports with the state bar; and (4) Tanner shall attend, at his own expense, the next Bridge the Gap program offered by the state bar.
In addition, we authorize the publication, in accordance with SCR 121, of the following letter of public reprimand:
To: MONT E. TANNER, ESQ.
You were a salaried employee of the law firm of Clark, Greene & Associates ("the Firm") from approximately October 1991 until March 1, 1995. While so employed, you worked on a personal injury case for clients J. William and Sandra Bate ("the Bates") and, in approximately September 1994, entered into a contingency fee arrangement with the Bates on behalf of the Firm.
You subsequently filed a civil complaint on behalf of the Bates in late 1994, styled J. William Bate and Sandra Bate v. Harold R. Syfert; Michael A. Simon; Roderick A. Richards and Harold Ingle ("the Bates' case"). Thereafter, in December 1994, you received a settlement offer in the amount of $50,000 from counsel for defendant Syfert, Robert Vannah, which you ultimately rejected on behalf of the Bates.
In January or February 1995, you received a second settlement offer from Vannah, on behalf of his client, in the amount of $85,000. At the time you neither accepted nor rejected this offer on behalf of the Bates. Shortly thereafter, on March 1, 1995, with lit
Page 1 2 3 Nevada Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|