 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Matter of Augenstein2/3/1994
JUDGMENT AND ORDER
This matter having come on for hearing before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona, it having duly rendered its decision and no timely appeal having been filed before the Court,
IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that STEVEN TODD AUGENSTEIN, a member of the State Bar of Arizona, is hereby censured for conduct in violation of his duties and obligations as a lawyer, as disclosed in the commission report attached hereto as Exhibit A.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that STEVEN TODD AUGENSTEIN shall pay restitution in the following amounts to the following individuals:
Patrick Gizis - $1,700.00
F.B. Jolley, M.D. - $2,547.71
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 52(a)(8), Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, the State Bar of Arizona is granted judgment against STEVEN TODD AUGENSTEIN for costs incurred by the State Bar of Arizona in the amount of $801.98, together with interest at the legal rate from the date of this judgment.
DATED this 3rd day of February, 1994.
EXHIBIT A
SB-94-0009-D
BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA
FILED NOV 15, 1993
DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION OF THE SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA
FILED JAN 20 1994
In the Matter of STEVEN TODD AUGENSTEIN, a Member of the State Bar of Arizona, RESPONDENT.
Comm. Nos. 91-0393, 91-1279
DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION REPORT
This matter came before the Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Arizona on September 11, 1993, for oral argument, pursuant to Rule 53(d), R. Ariz. Sup. Ct. The Commission considered the Hearing Committee's recommendation of probation. The State Bar filed an objection to the Hearing Committee's recommendation.
Sanction
After consideration of the arguments of the State Bar and Respondent, the Commission, with six members Concurring and two Dissenting, rejects the Committee's recommendation that Respondent be placed on a two-year probation only, and recommends that Respondent be censured. In addition, seven members of the Commission, with one Dissenting, concur in the recommendation that Respondent be placed on probation for a period of two years, under the terms and conditions set forth below, which are identical to those recommended by the Committee. Finally, a concurrence of the eight members present recommend that Respondent make restitution in the total amount of $4,247.71, to Clients A and the Doctor, as detailed in the probationary terms below.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
The Commission unanimously adopts the findings of fact and Conclusions of law of the Hearing Committee, with the additional finding that Respondent violated ER 1.2, ER 1.3, ER 1.4, and ER 1.15, as charged in the formal complaint.
Facts
Respondent was retained by Client A in February 1987 to represent him in a personal injury action resulting from an automobile accident. Client A provided Respondent with relevant documents concerning the damages he had incurred, but Respondent misplaced those documents. Respondent also failed to keep Client A informed about the status of the case. As a result of Respondent's inattention to the matter, Client A was compelled to settle his claim personally with the insurer for $1,700, although Respondent had indicated to Client A that the claim had a value of $3,000 to $4,000.
In October 1986, Respondent represented Client B regarding injuries she had sustained in an automobile accident. In November 1986, R
Page 1 2 3 4 Arizona Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|