New Hampshire Bar Association
About the Bar
For Members
For the Public
Legal Links
Publications
Newsroom
Online Store
Vendor Directory
NH Bar Foundation
Judicial Branch
NHMCLE

Set Your Business Apart - Advertise with NH Bar News!

Trust your transactions to the only payment solution recommended by over 50 bar associations.
New Hampshire Bar Association
Lawyer Referral Service Law Related Education NHBA CLE NHBA Insurance Agency
MyNHBar
Member Login
Member Portal
Casemaker

Bar News - December 14, 2012


Supreme Court Orders

Pursuant to Part II, Article 73-a of the New Hampshire Constitution and Supreme Court Rule 51(A)(7), the Supreme Court of New Hampshire adopts the following amendments to court rules.

I. Pro Hac Vice Fees

(These temporary amendments to court rules increase the fee charged to applicants seeking permission to appear pro hac vice from $225.00 to $250.00.)

1. Amend Supreme Court Rule 33(5), regarding nonmembers of the New Hampshire Bar, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix A.

2. Amend Supreme Court Rule 49(I), regarding fees in the Supreme Court, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix B.

3. Amend Superior Court Rule 19(e), regarding attorneys, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix C.

4. Amend Superior Court Rule 169(III), regarding fees, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix D.

5. Amend Circuit Court – District Division Rule 1.3(C)(5), regarding attorneys, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix E.

6. Amend Circuit Court – District Division Rule 3.3(I), regarding court fees, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix F.

7. Amend Circuit Court – Probate Division Rule 19(E), regarding attorneys – Appearing Pro Hac Vice, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix G.

8. Amend Circuit Court – Probate Division Rule 169(IV), regarding fees, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix H.

9. Amend Circuit Court – Family Division Rule 1.21(D), regarding Pro Hac Vice Representation, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix I.

10. Amend Circuit Court – Family Division Rule 1.3(M), regarding fees, on a temporary basis, as set forth in Appendix J.

II. New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education Requirement

(This technical amendment to Supreme Court Rule 53.2(B)(4) adds the deputy state reporter to the list of people exempt from the New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education requirement).

1. Amend Supreme Court Rule 53.2, regarding lawyers subject to the New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education Requirement, on a permanent basis, as set forth in Appendix K.

Effective Date

These amendments shall take effect on January 1, 2013. The temporary amendments in Appendix A-J shall be referred to the Advisory Committee on Rules for its recommendation as to whether they should be adopted on a permanent basis.

Date: November 15, 2012
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk of Court
Supreme Court of New Hampshire


LD-2012-0012
In the Matter of Peter A. Lagorio

On November 1, 2012, the Attorney Discipline Office filed a certified copy of the October 16, 2012 judgment of the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County (Massachusetts), disbarring Attorney Peter A. Lagorio. The matter came before the Supreme Judicial Court on an affidavit of resignation submitted by Attorney Lagorio and a recommendation of the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers that it be accepted and a judgment of disbarment entered. In the affidavit, Attorney Lagorio admitted that bar counsel could prove that he converted client funds over a period of time.

In accordance with Supreme Court Rule 37, the court now orders as follows:

(1) In accordance with Rule 37(12)(b) and 37(16)(d) and (f), Peter A. Lagorio is immediately suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire pending further order of this court.

(2) Attorney Lagorio may show cause on or before ten days from the date of service why the suspension should be lifted.

(3) Copies of this order and of the October 16, 2012 order of the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County (Massachusetts) shall be served on Attorney Lagorio by first class mail and certified mail, return receipt requested. A copy of this order shall also be sent to the Professional Conduct Committee by first class mail.

(4) Rule 37(12)(d) authorizes the court to impose final discipline identical or similar to the discipline imposed by another jurisdiction unless the disciplined attorney or the Professional Conduct Committee demonstrates, or the court finds, based upon one of the grounds as set forth in Rule 37(12)(d), that imposition of identical or substantially similar discipline would be unwarranted.

(5) Within 30 days of service of this order, Attorney Lagorio and the Professional Conduct Committee shall inform the court if they contend that the imposition of discipline identical or substantially similar to that imposed by the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County (Massachusetts) would be unwarranted, and if they so contend, of the reasons for their contention.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
DATE: November 19, 2011
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk

ADM-2012-0043
In the Matter of Peter A. McFarlane, Esquire

On August 16, 2012, the court suspended Attorney Peter A. McFarlane from the practice of law in New Hampshire for failing to pay his 2011/2012 bar dues. On October 12, 2012, Attorney McFarlane filed a petition for reinstatement in which he stated that he had paid his 2011/2012 bar dues and requested that he be reinstated to the practice of law. The New Hampshire Bar Association has confirmed that Attorney McFarlane has paid his bar dues. Attorney McFarlane’s petition for reinstatement is granted. Attorney McFarlane is reinstated to the practice of law, effective immediately.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
Date: November 21, 2012
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk



The Supreme Court of New Hampshire, pursuant to RSA 490:4, directs that proceedings in every State court in New Hampshire be suspended on Friday, March 8, 2013, to facilitate continuing judicial and legal education and to accommodate judges’ meetings being held in conjunction with the mid-year meeting of the New Hampshire Bar Association. A judge or master may decide not to suspend proceedings if the judge or master and the lawyers on a case do not plan to attend the mid-year meeting, or if the judge or master, in his or her discretion, decides that the efficient administration of the court or ensuring justice in a particular case compels that a case be scheduled for a hearing or trial, or that a hearing or trial continue to be litigated, on that day.

November 27, 2012
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk of Court Supreme Court of New Hampshire


LD-2011-0011
In the Matter of Patrick B. Shanley

In November 2011, Attorney Patrick B. Shanley was reprimanded by the Board of Bar Overseers of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. After receiving notification of this discipline, this court issued an order giving Attorney Shanley and the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) an opportunity to inform the court if they contended that the imposition of discipline identical or substantially similar to that imposed by the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers would be unwarranted. See Rule 37(12)(d). The PCC notified the court that it believed that substantially more serious discipline was warranted. Attorney Shanley filed no response to the order.

After reviewing the PCC’s response, the court remanded the matter to the PCC for a recommendation of the discipline that should be imposed. After a hearing, the PCC recommended that Attorney Shanley be suspended for six months, with three months of the suspension stayed for a period of one year. The PCC filed its recommendation with the court. An order was issued giving Attorney Shanley an opportunity to file a response to the PCC’s recommendation. No response was filed. On October 22, 2012, in response to an order from the court, the PCC filed a clarification of its recommendation.

Having reviewed the PCC’s recommendation, the court concludes that Attorney Shanley’s misconduct warrants more serious discipline than that imposed by the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers. The court accepts the PCC’s recommendation that Attorney Shanley be suspended for six months, with three months of the suspension stayed for a period of one year. Accordingly, the court orders as follows:

1. Attorney Patrick B. Shanley is suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire, effective December 1, 2012.

2. In accordance with Rule 37(14)(f), Attorney Shanley may file a motion for reinstatement with the court on or after March 1, 2013. Attorney Shanley is required to submit evidence that he has satisfactorily completed the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination with his motion for reinstatement.

3. Three months of Attorney Shanley’s suspension shall be stayed for a period of one year on the condition that no grievance or complaint of misconduct be filed against Attorney Shanley in New Hampshire or Massachusetts during the period of the stay, and that Attorney Shanley not be found to have violated the New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct or the equivalent Massachusetts rules during the period of the stay.

4. If the one-year period of stay expires without a breach of the condition, Attorney Shanley may file a motion to vacate the remaining period of suspension.

5. If the condition of the stay is breached while the stay is in effect, the PCC may file a motion requesting that the stay be extended, that the remaining period of suspension be imposed, or that other relief be granted. Attorney Shanley may file a response to the motion with the court within 30 days of filing.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
DATE: November 19, 2012
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk


ADM-2012-0104
In the Matter of Catherine Tucker, Esquire

On November 1, 2012, this court issued an order, in accordance with Rule 50-A(2), for Attorney Catherine Tucker to pay the fee of $100 assessed for late filing of her 2012 trust accounting certificate, or be suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire. Attorney Tucker has neither responded to the order, nor paid the late fees.

Accordingly, Attorney Tucker is hereby suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire. The court hereby requires that Attorney Tucker’s trust accounts and other financial records be audited at her expense.

Attorney Tucker is ordered to notify her clients in writing that she has been suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire and to notify the Attorney Discipline Office by Monday, February 4, 2013, that she has completed this task. On or before Thursday, February 14, 2013, the Attorney Discipline Office shall advise the court if it believes that an attorney should be appointed to make an inventory of Attorney Tucker’s files and to take action to protect the interests of her clients.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
DATE: December 6, 2012
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk


ADM-2012-0100
In the Matter of Jesse J. O’Neill, Esquire

On November 1, 2012, this court issued an order, in accordance with Rule 50-A(2), for Attorney Jesse J. O’Neill to pay the fee of $100 assessed for late filing of his 2012 trust accounting certificate, or be suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire. Attorney O’Neill has neither responded to the order, nor paid the late fees.

Accordingly, Attorney O’Neill is hereby suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire. The court hereby requires that Attorney O’Neill’s trust accounts and other financial records be audited at his expense. Attorney O’Neill is ordered to notify his clients in writing that he has been suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire and to notify the Attorney Discipline Office by Monday, February 4, 2013, that he has completed this task. On or before Thursday, February 14, 2013, the Attorney Discipline Office shall advise the court if it believes that an attorney should be appointed to make an inventory of Attorney O’Neill’s files and to take action to protect the interests of his clients.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
DATE: December 6, 2012
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk


ADM-2012-0101
In the Matter of Michael S. Reese, Esquire

On November 1, 2012, this court issued an order, in accordance with Rule 50-A(2), for Attorney Michael S. Reese to pay the fee of $100 assessed for late filing of his 2012 trust accounting certificate, or be suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire. Attorney Reese has neither responded to the order, nor paid the late fees.

Accordingly, Attorney Reese is hereby suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire. The court hereby requires that Attorney Reese’s trust accounts and other financial records be audited at his expense.

Attorney Reese is ordered to notify his clients in writing that he has been suspended from the practice of law in New Hampshire and to notify the Attorney Discipline Office by Monday, February, 4, 2013, that he has completed this task. On or before Thursday, February 14, 2013, the Attorney Discipline Office shall advise the court if it believes that an attorney should be appointed to make an inventory of Attorney Reese’s files and to take action to protect the interests of his clients.

Dalianis, C.J., and Hicks, Conboy, Lynn, and Bassett, JJ., concurred.
DATE: December 6, 2012
ATTEST: Eileen Fox, Clerk

NHLAP: A confidential Independent Resource

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