The following is an abbreviated form of the report, which may be found in its entirety on the Bar’s Web site.

I. Introduction

January 1, 2004, marked the beginning of the new attorney discipline system as defined by Supreme Court Rules 37 and 37A. The new rules expanded the authority of the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) to issue discipline ranging from a reprimand to a suspension of up to six months. The changes also reduced the number of Professional Conduct Committee members from 16 to 12 volunteers by establishing the Complaint Screening Committee (9 members) and the Hearings Committee (35 members) to redistribute functions. The former PCC staff became the staff of the Attorney Discipline Office (ADO), the fourth component of the new system. The new system was designed to streamline the processing of complaints by utilizing additional volunteers; creating boundaries between the investigatory, prosecutorial and adjudicative functions of the system; creating a degree of consistency in the presentation of charges through in-house disciplinary counsel at hearings; and adding a diversion component to the discipline system.

The pending caseload for the attorney discipline system as of January 1, 2004, included 35 cases, which had been voted by the PCC under the former system to warrant a hearing, and 114 docketed matters pending investigation from prior years, for a total of 149 matters.

On November 1, 2004, the Supreme Court approved revisions to Rules 37 and 37A, which clarified and made permanent several rules that had been previously implemented on a temporary basis.

II. Office Operations

During 2004, the ADO staff continued to field hundreds of hours of telephone calls from members of the public. A total of 2,323 calls were taken.

A total of 169 letters that were intended to be complaints were received by the ADO. The staff determined that 103 of these met the requirements for docketing.

III. Composition of Committees

The Complaint Screening Committee (CSC) was established with five attorney members and four lay members. The CSC processed the following matters in 2004:

The Hearings Committee (HC) was established with 22 attorney members and 13 lay members. Five attorney members of the HC served on the PCC under the old system, and brought significant experience to the process. These members took a leadership role in the first cases assigned. Two orientation sessions were held to accommodate the size of the Committee.

The PCC continued [but} due to the implementation of the new attorney discipline system, there was an initial lag before matters reached the PCC. This was caused by complaints being initially processed through the earlier stages of the system. The PCC concluded 5 matters in the first 5 months of 2004, compared to 11 matters in the latter 7 months of 2004.

­IV. Statistics

[There follow several charts, one listing underlying legal matters, another years of practice in NH at the time of the filing of the complaint; these charts may be viewed in the complete report on the Bar’s Web site.]

Figure A illustrates the types of underlying legal matters giving rise to docketed complaints in the past three years.

Figure B shows the number of years the attorney was admitted to practice in New Hampshire at the time the complaint was filed.

Shown in Figure C is the distribution of misconduct findings for the past three years, sorted by the number of years the attorney was in practice at the time of the finding. 2004 findings were significantly lower, due to the changes in the attorney discipline system.

Figure D is a breakdown of the Rules that were found to have been violated in 2003 and 2004.

Figure E illustrates violations of Rules as a percentage of total violations. All matters also include a violation of Rule 8.4(a), which is not calculated into the percentage.

Figure F shows a breakdown of the number of complaints that were concluded by the Attorney Discipline System, arranged by the year the complaint was docketed, for the years 2002 through 2004.

V.   Disposal of Matters by the Supreme Court

Disciplinary Counsel filed one petition for a two-year suspension and one petition for disbarment in 2004. The Supreme Court concluded two matters under the old system, currently has eight matters pending from prior years, and two matters pending from the new system.

VI.  Conclusion

The CSC referred 32 new matters for a hearing in 2004. Approximately one-third of each meeting is devoted to matters previously considered but not docketed. The CSC reviews volumes of materials in preparation for each meeting, and conducts a debate in consideration of each matter.

In 2004, the HC processed 16 matters. With the exception of one volunteer, all (HC) members served on at least one hearing panel, 25 served on two hearing panels, and one served on three hearing panels.

The PCC concluded, on average, two matters per month during the second half of the year. Four oral arguments were conducted; 16 orders issued; and the Committee deliberated on several complicated issues. The entire record in each matter is reviewed by each Committee member prior to oral argument. In addition, each committee member participates in the deliberations and review of written opinions prior to their issuance. There were seven matters with findings of professional misconduct and discipline imposed.

The attorney discipline system’s work in 2004 focused on addressing the backlog of outstanding cases docketed from 2003 and earlier. As of December 31, 2004, there were 97 outstanding matters at various stages from 2003 and earlier, and 102 matters outstanding from 2004, for a total of 199 matters.

Disciplinary Counsel took action on 31 matters in 2004, closed 15 matters, and received 32 new matters for a hearing. As of December 31, 2004, there were 52 matters that have been recommended for a hearing. The office utilized three interns from Franklin Pierce Law Center who assisted in research, writing and trial preparation.

Parties interfacing with the new system report that they are very pleased with the thoroughness in which matters are handled. The ADO continues to work towards reducing the backlog of cases. The goal is to reduce the backlog to no more than one year.

Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store
Lawyer Referral Service | Law-Related Education | NHBA•CLE | NHBA Insurance Agency | NHMCLE
Search | Calendar

New Hampshire Bar Association
2 Pillsbury Street, Suite 300, Concord NH 03301
phone: (603) 224-6942 fax: (603) 224-2910
email: NHBAinfo@nhbar.org
© NH Bar Association Disclaimer