"Clearly, [the attorney] needs a better understanding of his ethical obligations, the vulnerability of clients under the stress of a dissolution or facing criminal charges, and the impact a sexual relationship between him and his client has on his client and his own ability to professionally represent that client. Without this knowledge, [he] poses a risk to the public. We also note, however, that [he] has contributed a significant amount of time to the representation of clients on a pro bono basis. In addition, members of the bar and of the judiciary testified at the hearing that, other than the matter that brought [him] to the attention of the disciplinary authorities, he has practiced in an ethical fashion. Taking all of the pertinent factors into consideration, we concur in the commission’s recommendation that [his] license to practice law in this state be suspended for thirty days."
___________________________
According to Mike Frisch, "the court rejected the contention that a violation of the 'sex-with-client' rule establishes a per se violation of the 'conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice' prohibition." On the down-side this character only received a 30 day suspension.
No comments:
Post a Comment