Joseph Daniel Thompson v. Kentucky Bar Association ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                                                              TO BE P
    ,Suprrtur Courf if(fittztiiirtftlu,
    2016-SC-000262-KB          U
    JOSEPH DANIEL THOMPSON
    DATE            M
    OVANT
    be.
    V.                            IN SUPREME COURT
    KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION                                          RESPONDENT
    OPINION AND ORDER
    Pursuant to SCR 3.480(2), Movant, Joseph Daniel Thompson, moves this
    Court to impose a 181 day suspension from the practice of law for his admitted
    violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, with 120 days of the
    suspension probated for 2 years on the condition that he not receive any new
    charges from the Inquiry Commission during his probationary period. The
    Kentucky Bar Association (KBA) has no objection to this negotiated discipline.
    Finding this agreed upon disciplinary sanction to be appropriate under
    the facts of this case, we grant Movant's motion. Movant's Kentucky Bar
    Association (KBA) member number is 88578 and his bar roster address is
    listed as 108 North Main Street, Somerset, Kentucky, 42505. Movant was
    admitted to the practice of law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky on October
    14, 2000.
    KBA FILE 21298
    Mabab Trade, LLC, entrusted Movant with $775,000.00 to be used in
    connection with a proposed investment transaction between Mabab, Jason
    Castenir, and four other investors. Movant initially and appropriately placed
    the funds into his office escrow account.
    About seven weeks later, Mabab requested the return of the funds in
    their entirety. An attempt to wire the escrow funds back to Mabab was
    unsuccessful due to a lack of funds in Movant's escrow account. At the time of
    the refund request, the escrow account contained a balance of approximately
    $373,131.13. Following this unsuccessful transfer attempt, Movant wired
    Mabab $300,000.00 about two weeks later, and an additional $47,000.00
    about two weeks after that.
    The remaining $427,500.00 was eventually returned to Mabab; not from
    Movant's escrow account, however, but rather from Maverick Asset
    Management, who had originally received the funds from the escrow account
    via a transfer initiated by Jason Castenir, one of the original investors. Movant
    had given Castenir, who is not an attorney, access to the escrow account with
    instructions to obtain prior approval from Movant before making any transfers
    from the account. Castenir did not, however, get Movant's approval before
    initiating the transfer of funds to Maverick Asset Management.
    In connection with his failure to immediately return the funds to Mabab
    upon request, Movant falsely told the Manager of Mabab that the funds were
    2
    secure even though a portion of the funds had already been transferred to
    Maverick Asset Management; falsely told him that the escrow account could
    not be accessed temporarily due to an audit when, in fact, there was no audit;
    and falsely told him that the funds were "tied up" due to a pending lawsuit in
    Texas when, in fact, there actually was no such lawsuit.
    Mabab filed a lawsuit against Movant and others in connection with the
    mishandling of its funds, and the case was eventually settled, with Movant's
    portion of the settlement being $95,000.00, which he has paid. In summary,
    Mabab has been made whole, and Movant has fully complied with his
    obligations under the settlement.
    As a result of the above conduct the Inquiry Commission charged Movant
    with violating SCR 3.130(1.15)(a) (failure to maintain funds in escrow); SCR
    3.130(5.3(b) (inadequate supervision of a non-lawyer); and SCR 3.130(8.4)(c)
    (dishonest, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation). Movant admits that his
    conduct as described above violates the Rules as charged by the Inquiry
    Commission, and we accordingly hold that the Movant violated the Rules as
    just described.
    DISPOSITION
    Movant now moves this Court to enter an order suspending him for a
    period of 181 days with 120 of those days suspended for a period of two years
    under the condition that he receives no further charges during the
    probationary period. The KBA has no objection to the proposed discipline,
    3
    which was negotiated pursuant to SCR 3.480(2). 1 Upon review of the facts in
    this case and relevant case law, we find the proposed discipline is appropriate.
    See KBA v. Schaffner, 
    2015 WL 1544453
    (Ky. 2015), and Dutra v. KBA, 
    440 S.W.3d 374
    (Ky. 2014).
    Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
    1) Movant, Joseph Daniel Thompson, is suspended from the practice of
    law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky for 181 days, with 120 of those
    days suspended under the condition that he commit no further
    ethical violations during the suspension period.
    2) Pursuant to SCR 3.390, and to the extent that he has not done so as
    a result of his prior suspension, Respondent shall notify in writing, all
    courts in which he has matters pending of his suspension from the
    practice of law, and notify in writing all clients of his inability to
    represent them and of the necessity and urgency of promptly
    retaining new counsel. "Such notification shall be by letter duly
    1 "The Court may consider negotiated sanctions of disciplinary investigations,
    complaints or charges prior to the commencement of a hearing before a Trial
    Commissioner under SCR 3.240. Any member who is under investigation pursuant to
    SCR 3.160(2) or who has a complaint or charge pending in this jurisdiction, and who
    desires to terminate such investigation or disciplinary proceedings at any stage of it
    may request Bar Counsel to consider a negotiated sanction. If the member and Bar
    Counsel agree upon the specifics of the facts, the rules violated, and the appropriate
    sanction, the member shall file a motion with the Court which states such agreement,
    and serve a copy upon Bar Counsel, who shall, within 10 days of the Clerk's notice
    that the motion has been docketed, respond to its merits and confirm its agreement.
    The Disciplinary Clerk shall submit to the Court within the 10 day period the active
    disciplinary files to which the motion applies. The Court may approve the sanction
    agreed to by the parties, or may remand the case for hearing or other proceedings
    specified in the order of remand."
    4
    placed in the United States mail within ten days of the date of this
    Opinion and Order. Respondent shall simultaneously provide a copy
    of all such letters to the Office of Bar Counsel. Furthermore, to the
    extent possible and necessary, Respondent shall immediately cancel
    and cease any advertising activities in which he is engaged.
    3) If Movant commits any ethical violations during the probationary
    period, the KBA should undertake appropriate filings with this Court
    to revoke the suspension period.
    4) Pursuant to SCR 3.450, Movant is directed to pay all costs associated
    with these disciplinary proceedings, in the amount of $47.60, for
    which execution, may issue from this Court upon finality of this
    Opinion and Order.
    All sitting. All concur.
    ENTERED: August 25, 2016.
    5
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2016 SC 000262

Filed Date: 9/12/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/15/2016