Major changes took place in the New Hampshire lawyer disciplinary process beginning on April 1, 2000 for grievances received by the committee on or after that date. The requirements for docketing grievances as complaints were changed to require that grievants have standing (with the exception of referrals by courts or by other attorneys to satisfy their own ethical obligations) and that they be submitted under oath. Additionally, grievances that are not docketed as complaints (because they failed to satisfy the requirements for docketing) are sent to the subject attorneys, who are given a period of 30 days to submit responses if they wish. At the end of the 30 days, the

non-docketed grievances, along with any responses received, are available for public inspection for a period of two years. Further, for those complaints received after April 1, 2000 and that are docketed but dismissed without a hearing, with findings of no professional misconduct, become available for public inspection upon the date of the dismissal. The remainder of complaints – i.e. those that proceed to hearing – become public upon the issuance of the Notice of Charges through which a hearing is formally scheduled. It remains to be seen what effects these changes will have on the statistics of activities of the committee.

There were several changes in committee membership during 2000, beginning on Feb. 4, 2000 with the appointment of Virginia C. Beecher of Bow as a new lay member succeeding Siobhan Tautkus for a term expiring Aug. 1, 2001. Landya B. McCafferty was also appointed on that date to replace James Schulte from Strafford County, who had completed his term and was no longer eligible for reappointment. On Oct. 16, 2000, David N. Cole of Hanover was appointed as a new member. Martha Van Oot was appointed for a one-year term by virtue of her position as vice president of the New Hampshire Bar Association. Reverend Marthe F. Dyner was appointed as a new member of the committee effective Jan. 2, 2001, replacing lay member Elizabeth Crory for a term expiring Aug. 1, 2003. Finally, Margaret H. Nelson and Bayard F. Pope, III were designated as attorney and non-attorney vice chairs of the committee, effective April 1, 2000.

The committee received a total of 302 letters that were intended to be complaints in 2000. Of these, 170 were determined by the committee staff to allege conduct that violated the New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct and to otherwise satisfy the requirements for docketing as complaints. This amounts to approximately 56 percent of the letters received, which is substantially higher than the 38 percent docketed in 1999 and the 40 percent docketed in 1998. The 132 undocketed matters include 71 letters intended as complaints that were received prior to the effective date of the rule changes and 61 grievances that were received by the committee on or after April 1, 2000 and that were not docketed. (In addition to the 302 letters intended as complaints discussed above there were several matters received by the committee during 2000, for which the staff had written back to grievants for further information or to have notarized, or that were in the process of being evaluated at year’s end. To be consistent with prior years, the statistics concerning those matters will be included in the annual report for 2001 and will therefore be reflected in the totals for the year in which decisions on those matters are made.)

Presumably the new requirements for standing and for complaints to be submitted under oath may be an explanation for the lower number of non-docketed grievances during the period after April 1, 2000.

Reversing a two-year trend, the number of matters docketed as complaints increased from 139 that were docketed in 1999. This figure also represents an increase from the 160 that were docketed in 1998 and is more in line with figures from 1997 and 1996 (176 and 166 respectively). There was a decrease of 17 percent in the overall number of letters received that were intended as complaints from the number that were received in 1999 (366).

The committee received 1,681 calls in 2000 relating to potential or ongoing complaints of attorney misconduct. Committee staff also attended in-person meetings with potential complainants on 85 different occasions (mostly walk-ins), up from 56 in 1999 and 70 in 1998.

Telephone contacts by potential complainants resulted in information packets being sent out that included committee rules, Rules of Professional Conduct and oath forms on 364 different occasions between April 1, 2000 and Dec. 31, 2000.

The 170 complaints docketed in 2000 were against 152 different attorneys. Of these, 17 attorneys had two complaints each docketed against them, three had three complaints and two had four complaints. Of the 170 complaints docketed, 18 were docketed against two different attorneys and one was against three different attorneys.

The number of different attorneys receiving complaints in 2000 (152) represents an increase of 24 from 1999 and an increase of one from 1998 (151). The number of attorneys receiving multiple complaints in 2000 (22) represents seven more than the 15 who received multiple complaints in 1999 and five more than those in 1998 (17).

As previously stated, in 2000 there was a significant increase in the number of docketed complaints, reversing a two-year trend in which docketed matters decreased. In 2000 the committee docketed 170 matters, which included 48 which were docketed under the rules that were effective for matters received by the committee prior to April 1, 2000 and 122 that were governed by the amended rules. In 2000, there were 152 different lawyers represented by the 170 docketed complaints. Displayed in Figure A, attached, are the number of complaints and the number of lawyers receiving complaints during the years 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 and 2000. While it is difficult to compare figures from year to year due to the fact that several complaints involve multiple lawyers and some lawyers receive multiple complaints, the figures for 2000 show a substantial increase in the caseload in both the number of docketed complaints and the number of attorneys receiving multiple complaints.

As in prior years, by far the largest number of docketed complaints were received from the clients of the attorneys who were subject of those complaints (91 of 170 docketed complaints). The next most common complaints were those filed by opposing parties, amounting to 40 of the 170 docketed complaints. Referrals by judges, clerks of court and other attorneys that resulted in committee-generated complaints accounted for 20 of the complaints. Five of the complaints were filed by opposing attorneys in their own names who elected to remain as named complainants. The remaining 14 complaints came from a variety of sources. The distribution of complaints, by source, was fairly consistent with the experience of the committee in prior years.

The underlying legal matters from which docketed complaints arose for the years 1999 and 2000 are shown in Figure B. In 2000, divorce and family law matters gave rise to the largest number of complaints, being the source of 44 of the 170 docketed matters. Criminal matters were a close second, accounting for 41 of the complaints. Real estate and condominium matters gave rise to 28 of the complaints, which is up significantly from 1999. While there were no complaints docketed arising from zoning matters, landlord/tenant matters or worker’s compensation matters in 2000, the distribution of matters by type of underlying legal dispute appears fairly consistent with prior years.

The distribution of complaints docketed in the year 2000 by year of admission to practice is shown in Figure C, attached. Unlike in prior years, during 2000 there was not a significant difference in the number of complaints by category of length of time in practice, until the category of 31-35 years in practice is reached.

During 2000, hearings on the merits of complaints were held at 10 of the 12 monthly meetings. In addition, one special hearing day was held on one matter. A total of 33 hearings were held on the merits on regular meeting days. In four additional matters, the committee scheduled hearings on the failure of the attorneys to respond to the complaints as required by the committee’s rules and procedures.

During 2000, the committee made findings of professional misconduct with regard to 19 different attorneys in 20 different complaints. In 13 of these matters, the committee elected to issue reprimands. In two matters, the committee voted to proceed with petitions to the Supreme Court for public censure of the attorneys involved. In one matter the committee elected to pursue a petition requesting that the attorney be suspended from the practice of law for one year and in four matters the committee decided to pursue disbarment petitions of the attorneys involved.

In Figure D, attached, can be found the distribution of misconduct findings by years of admission. The largest number of findings of misconduct appears for attorneys having practiced in the range of six to 20 years (three separate five-year categories – all with similar numbers of findings).

In the 20 matters in which the committee found professional misconduct in 2000, there were a total of 96 different rule violations found. As in all past years, the majority of these rule violations involved rules governing a lawyer’s duties owed to the client. Appearing in Figures E and F is a listing of the rules found to have been violated and a graph showing the distribution of findings by major categories of rules.

The committee concluded a total of 132 complaints in 2000, which includes the 20 matters that were concluded with findings of professional misconduct and 112 matters that were dismissed with findings of no professional misconduct on the part of the attorneys involved. Of the matters dismissed with findings of no professional misconduct, 27 were dismissed with warnings concerning issues that the committee believed did not amount to professional misconduct but involved behavior that required attention.

Of the 132 concluded matters, five resulted in findings of professional misconduct for which the committee elected to file petitions for public censure, suspension or disbarment with the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

Matters that were initially docketed in 2000 constituted 58 of the 132 complaints that were concluded. A total of 56 matters were concluded that were originally docketed in 1999, 15 that were originally docketed in 1998, and three that had been initiated in 1997.

Of the 112 matters dismissed with findings of no professional misconduct, 62 were dismissed after the committee had received answers and replies to answers back and forth and had reached the conclusion that it would be unable to find by clear and convincing evidence that any misconduct occurred. Of these 62, seven were dismissed with warnings. An additional 37 complaints were dismissed following review and evaluation by committee members, 13 of which were dismissed with warnings. Thirteen matters were dismissed after hearings on the merits, seven with warnings.

Matters concluded at the end of the administrative process (answer and replies back and forth) amounted to 47 percent of the matters concluded in 2000 as compared with 43 percent in 1999. Of the total concluded in 2000, 109 (representing 83 percent of the concluded matters) were concluded without the need for a hearing. Of the 33 matters that were concluded following hearings, 61 percent resulted in findings of professional misconduct.

Figure G, attached, shows the number of matters that were concluded by the committee in 2000 by the categories of new and holdover complaints during the period of 1996 through 2000. Figure H shows the breakdown of all concluded matters by the manner in which they were disposed for 1996 through 2000.

Four final orders were issued by the Supreme Court during 2000 on matters in which the committee had filed petitions for discipline. In one matter, in which the committee had filed a petition for public censure, the court remanded the matter to the committee for the imposition of a private reprimand after the issuance of a report of the judicial referee. In one matter, an attorney was suspended for a period of one year, as sought by the committee. In another matter in which the committee had sought the respondent’s disbarment, the court issued a one-year suspension following a hear ing and the issuance of a report by the judicial referee. In the fourth matter, the court issued a public censure, as requested by the committee, in a matter that was not contested by the respondent. In addition to these four matters, the court also issued an order granting the reinstatement of an attorney who had been suspended from the practice of law for a period of two years in 1997 and granting an attorney who had been disbarred in 1996 leave to take the February 2001 New Hampshire Bar Examination after the majority report of the committee had recommended the granting of his petition for readmission.

Substantial changes that went into effect during 2000 have had significant effects on the manner in which grievances are processed. There were major changes in the confidentiality provisions of the rules, which resulted in New Hampshire becoming one of the most open systems in the country. Procedural rule changes were also adopted that created requirements relating to standing and that grievances be submitted under oath, in order to be docketed as complaints. While the number of matters docketed during 2000 markedly increased, whether this increase represents a trend as a result of the revisions to the rules remains to be evaluated.

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