A Burlington attorney has been suspended from the practice of law for six months in a ruling by the state Supreme Court for what the Office of Lawyer Regulation termed a pattern of misconduct and incompetence.
The court agreed in its decision filed Dec. 12 that Suzanne M. Smith committed 20 of the 22 counts of misconduct charged by the Office of Lawyer Regulation.
In addition to the license suspension, Smith was ordered to pay nearly $14,000 in prosecution costs and reimburse the state public defender’s office $112 she billed for work on a criminal appeal that wasn’t completed.
According to the Supreme Court’s ruling, the Office of Lawyer Regulation (OLR) filed a complaint against Smith in December 2011 and later amended it in May 2012 consisting of 182 paragraphs describing 22 counts of misconduct. The complaint focused on Smith’s work in four matters.
Shortly before a scheduled discipline hearing, Smith pled no contest to nine of the 22 counts. The stipulation was accepted by the referee in the case. However, following a two-day disciplinary hearing the referee also determined that the OLR had proven misconduct on 11 or the 13 non-stipulated counts.
The OLR alleged that Smith performed substandard work by neglecting to deposit checks on behalf of clients, billing for work that wasn’t done, lying to and failing to answer client questions, and missing deadlines.
Smith appealed the referee’s decision, arguing that the suspension and costs are excessive and do not fully consider the mitigating factors impacting her practice during the period in question. Among those, according to the court’s ruling, are “significant health issues” suffered by both Smith and her husband; her expression of remorse for her conduct; her recent efforts to improve management and organization of her law practice; and her history of serving low-income clients.
However, in response, the court wrote:
“Weighing more heavily against Attorney Smith are the facts that both this case and her previous disciplinary case show a troubling pattern of poor bookkeeping, office mismanagement, inadequate communication with clients, and insufficient concern for her clients’ reasonable needs.”
Smith had been publicly reprimanded in 2009 for misconduct in three separate matters.
The court contends a suspension is warranted to convince Smith – whom it noted displayed a pattern of “excuse-making, blame-shifting and obfuscation” – not to commit similar professional transgressions in the future.
Under the ruling, Smith will have to petition the court for reinstatement after a period of six months.
“Doing so will require her to demonstrate … that she has made efforts to remedy the causes of her repeated failures to serve her clients,” the court wrote.
-
-
-
-
-