WPC* # VUNa % 0 w@C 4  0 0Dx U> 0J D 0TL 0^ 0h 0rf U> 0| 0 0 1u 0d B D3 0@U >U 6OB)DC AMU*>Rhp*.<j0xvO v~!vx# AOK)) 0D`* D/* B*HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(f3$X=XXXX  Xu?XXX= {DDӀz!3|x((3:$ 3!XvYXXXX  XYXXXvY   `   0  (#$  0  <( 9Z &Courier Regular2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  <( 9Z &Courier Regular2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X d$$$$'dxd("$    <  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d11117Border 1dd-2C << G<  9p`(Arial H !  #d#/   X   0  44   YYY FILED4X October14,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.4AppellateCourtClerk  f !#d#/   X   0   $       ThesettlementcheckwasmadepayabletoDeborahDalton,DannyDockery,andthetwootherattorneysthatDaltoninitiallyconsultedinthiscauseofaction.  !#d#/   X   0   $       TherecordrevealsthatDockerypaidDolinskyonMay21,1992. $ !#d#/   X   0   $       Under37.02(A),whereapartyfailstoobeyadiscoveryorder,thecourtmay orderthatthemattersregardingwhichtheorderwasmadeoranyotherdesignatedfactsshallbetakentobeestablishedforthepurposesoftheactioninaccordancewiththeclaimofthepartyobtainingtheorder.Tenn.R.Civ.P.37.02(A). Rule37.02(B)allowsthetrialcourttoenter [a]norderrefusingtoallowthedisobedientpartytosupportoropposedesignatedclaimsordefenses,orprohibitingthatpartyfromintroducingdesignatedmattersinevidence.Tenn.R.Civ.P.37.02(B).  !#d#/   X   0   $       Tenn.CodeAnn.233201(3)providesthatanyattorney,solicitor,orcounseloratlawadmittedtopracticeinthecourtsofTennesseemaybedisbarredorsuspendedfromthepracticeoflawforwrongfullyretainingmoneyorpropertyofaclientforanunreasonableperiodoftimeafterademandhasbeenmade. & !#d#/   X   0   $       Thetrialcourts reviewshallbeonthetranscriptoftheevidencebeforethehearingcommittee,itsfindingsandjudgmentanduponsuchotherproofaseitherpartymaydesiretointroduce.Thetrialjudgeshallweightheevidenceanddeterminethefactsbythepreponderanceoftheproof.Sup.Ct.R.9,1.3.0 l !#d#/   X   0   $       ThesecircumstancesappearinStandardsforImposingLawyerSanctions9.22(ABA1986).TheBoardhasadoptedthesestandardsfordisciplinarymatters.  !#d#/   X   0   $       ThesettlementforDaltonis$7,500.Theattorneysfeeisonethirdaftermedicalsarepaid.ThemedicalsforDolinskytotaled$1,068.Subtractingthemedicalsfromthesettlementleaves$6,432.OnethirdofthisastheattorneysfeeleavesDockerywith$2,144,$976ofthatgoingtoBeider,theFloridaattorney.Daltonisentitledtotwothirdsof$6,432or$4,288.Daltonhasalreadyreceived$2,500;therefore,sheisdue$1,788. E !#d#/   X   0   $       Weinterpret furtherlegaleducationtomeanaregularcurriculumcourse,notacontinuinglegaleducationcourse.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   BA Op Geneva  BA Op Geneva -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . /   X   0         7  XXdd7\RA'\ћ@ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ ATJACKSON         DANNYKAYEDOCKERY,  ) FORPUBLICATION      )   Appellant,   ) Filed:October14,1996      ) v.      ) SHELBYCOUNTY      ) ` XTHEBOARDOFPROFESSIONAL ) HON.J.STEVENSTAFFORD,RESPONSIBILITYOFTHE  ) JUDGESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE, )      )ٜL352;+'h|` - `Lߛ Appellee.    ) No.02S019507CH00056    ForAppellant:      ForAppellee:DannyK.Dockery    LauraL.ChastainProSe      DeputyChiefMemphis,TN     DisciplinaryCounsel       Nashville,TN @  OPINIONAFFIRMEDASMODIFIED.       BIRCH,C.J.   DannyKayeDockery,Esquire,appealsthejudgmentoftheChanceryCourtofShelbyCountysuspendinghimfromthepracticeoflawforspecifiedviolationsoftheCodeofProfessionalResponsibilitycommittedinconnectionwithhisrepresentationofϜDeborahDalton.Afterapainstakingexaminationoftherecordandathoroughconsiderationoftheissuespresented,wefindthattherecordfullysupportsthetrialcourtsjudgmentexceptastotheamountofmoneyDockerymustpayDaltonasaprerequisiteforreinstatement.  I    TherecordindicatesthatDaltonwasinjuredinanautomobileaccidentinSeptember1985.ShereceivedmedicaltreatmentataMemphishospitalandconsultedalocalattorneytohandleherclaim.Soonthereafter,shemovedtothestateofFlorida,wheresheobtainedfurthermedicaltreatmentfromJeromeM.Dolinsky,P.A.,D.C.Also,sheengagedE.RandallBeider,aFloridalawyer,tohandleherclaimforpersonalinjuryarisingoutoftheautomobileaccident.  InDecember1986,DaltonreturnedtoMemphis,terminatedheragreementwithBeider,andretainedDockerytorepresentherinherclaim.SheagreedtopayDockeryacontingentfeeofonethirdoftheproceedsremainingafterpaymentofmedicalexpenses.OnMarch17,1987,Dockery,atDolinskysrequest,agreedtowithholdandremitDolinskysfeesfromanyrecovery.  Evidently,DockerynegotiatedDaltonsclaimtosettlement.OnNovember17,1987,theinsurerissueditscheckintheamountof$7,500infullsettlementofDaltonsclaim. 6   ׀DockerydepositedthischeckintohisescrowaccountonDecember8,1987.  OnDecember9,1987,DockeryissuedachecktoDaltonintheamountof$2,500.Thecheckisinscribed FullsettlementtocloseDaltonv.Coffey.DockerydidnotinformDolinskyofthesettlementorthatsomeoftheproceedsremainedinhisescrowaccount.HedidnotremitanyfundstoDolinskyatthispoint.Moreover,DockerydidnotprovideDaltonwithanaccountingorotherstatementshowinghowthefundsreceivedtohercredithadbeendisbursed.  Dolinskysubsequentlydiscoveredthatthecasehadbeensettledandfundsdisbursed.Hewagedanaggressiveandpersistentefforttocollecthisfeeof$1,068formedicalservicesrendered.Theseeffortsprovedfutile.OnJuly1,1991,DolinskycomplainedtotheBoardofProfessionalResponsibilitythatDockeryhadnotpaidhim. 7     DolinskyscomplaintledtotheinitiationofformaldisciplinarychargesagainstDockery.InapetitionfiledDecember19,1991,theBoardofProfessionalResponsibilitychargedDockerywithviolationofthefollowingdisciplinaryrules:8 8 8 DR1102(A)(1)(violatingadisciplinaryrule);8 8 8 DR1102(A)(3)(engaginginillegalconductinvolvingmoralturpitude);8 8 8 DR1102(A)(4)(engaginginconductinvolvingdishonesty);8 8 8 DR1102(A)(5)(engaginginconductprejudicialtotheadminstrationofjustice);8 8 8 DR1102(A)(6)(engaginginconductadverselyreflectingonfitnesstopracticelaw);8 8 8 DR1106(A)(collectingorchargingexcessivefee);8 8 8 DR6101(A)(1)(handlinglegalmatternotcompetenttohandle);8 8 8 DR6101(A)(2)(handlinglegalmatterwithoutadequatepreparation);8 8 8 DR6101(A)(3)(neglectinglegalmatterentrustedtolawyer);8 8 8 DR7101(A)(1)(failingtoactdiligentlyandpromptly);8 8 8 DR7101(A)(2)(failingtokeepclientinformedofstatusofcase);8 8 8 DR7101(A)(3)(failingtoprovideclientwithsufficientinformationtomakeinformeddecision);8 8 8 DR7101(A)(4)(failingtocomplywithemploymentcontract);8 8 8 DR7101(A)(8)(knowinglyengaginginillegalorunethicalconduct);8 8 8 DR9102(A)(failingtoproperlydepositclientfunds);8 8 8 DR9102(B)(1)(failingtopromptlynotifyclientofthereceiptoffunds);8 8 8 DR9102(B)(2)(failingtoproperlyidentifyclientfunds);8 8 8 DR9102(B)(3)(failingtoproperlymaintainrecordsofclientfunds);and8 8 8 DR9102(B)(4)(failingtopromplypayclient).  II    Thedisciplinaryproceedingprogressed;itsoonbecameapparentthatasettlementcouldnotbeeffected.Accordingly,ahearingpanelwasappointedpursuanttoRule9,6.4,RulesoftheSupremeCourtofTennessee.Therecordreflectsthatduringthediscoveryprocesspriortotheformalhearingbeforethedisciplinaryhearingpanel,Dockeryswillfulandpersistenteffortstoderailtheprocessbecameasourceofconsummatefrustrationforthepanel.Dockeryseizedeveryopportunitytothwart,stymie,anddelaytheorderlyprogressofthecause,anditsproceduralpathispavedwithDockerysunkeptpromisesanddilatoryploys.SoegregiousandblatantwasDockerysresistancethatcounselfortheBoardsoughtandreceivedordersofsanctionpursuanttoRule37.02(A)and(B),TennesseeRulesofCivilProcedure. 8   ׀  Sanctionsnotwithstanding,thehearingpanelconvenedandtookprooffromseveralwitnessesandfromDockery.Histestimony,inthemain,addressedmattersmoremitigatinginnature,andhemadenoseriouscontestofthesalientfacts.Inthesecircumstances,thefactsuponwhichtheviolationsweregroundedstandvirtuallyintactasalleged.Therecordreveals,nonetheless,thatthepanelextendedtoDockeryeverymodicumof dueprocess.PerhapsthebestexampleofthisdeferenceisfoundinthepanelsdecisiontopermitDockerytotestify,therebydisregardingthesanctionspreviouslyrequestedandimposed.  Afterafullevidentiaryhearing,thepanelfoundthatϜDockery,indeed,hadviolatedseveralsectionsoftheCodeofProfessionalResponsibilityinconnectionwiththeDaltonmatter.ϜThepanelsfindingsandconclusionsarequotedasfollows:8 0 8  ItisthefindingofthePanelthatinnumerousinstancesoveranextendedperiodRespondentcomingledentrustedfundswithhispersonalfunds,thathemisappliedandmisappropriatedtohisownuseandbenefitthefundsentrustedtohim.Hefailedtopayhisclienttheamountshewasowedandfailedtomaintainhisrecordsinaprofessionalmannerthatwouldpermithimtodemonstratewhathehaddonewiththesettlementproceeds.TheproofdemonstratedapatternbyRespondentofmismanaginghisescrowaccount,hisescrowaccountrecordsandusinghisescrowaccountforpaymentofpersonalandofficeexpensesandshowingnoappreciationfortheimportanceofmaintaininghisrecordsaccuratelyanddoingthisoveranextendedperiodoftime.TheactsandomissionsoftheRespondentconstituteviolationsofthefollowingprovisionsoftheCodeofProfessionalResponsibility:0 0 8 DR1102 Misconduct...0 8 8 DR9102 PreservingIdentityofFundsofPropertyofaClient...0 8 8  ThePanelalsofindsaviolationofT.C.A.233201(3).... 9   כ8 0 8  RespondentsrefusalandfailuretoappropriatelyrespondtoDisciplinaryCounselandtheBoardregardingallegationsofethicalmisconductconstitutesanadditionalviolationofDR1102(A)(5)(6).  Thepanelimposedthefollowingsanctions:0 8 8 1.Suspensionoflicensefortwoyears;0 8 8 2.Reinstatementtobeconditionedupon:0 8 8 8 A.Paymentof$1,500toDalton,and0 8 8 8 B.SuccessfulcompletionofathreehourlegalethicscourseatanaccreditedTennesseelawschool.  DockeryprosecutedanappealinthenatureofapetitionforwritofcertioraritotheChanceryCourtofShelbyCounty,arightprovidedbySupremeCourtRule9,8.3.Thetrialcourtheardthematter,andagainDockerytestifiedinhisownbehalf.Attheconclusionofthehearing,thetrialcourtenteredanorderadoptingthefindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawreachedbythepanelandapprovedthedisciplineimposed.  III    DockeryisbeforethisCourtasamatterofrightpursuanttoRule9,1.3,RulesoftheSupremeCourtofTennessee.Theissuesare:(1)whetherthetrialcourterredinrefusingtoadmitcertainevidence;and(2)whetherthereinstatementconditionswerereasonable.  SupremeCourtRule9,1.3limitsourreviewto thetranscriptoftherecordfromthecircuitorchancerycourt,whichshallincludethetranscriptofevidencebeforethehearing[panel].Ourstandardofreviewisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialcourtwithapresumptionofcorrectnessunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourtsfindings. :   ׀Tenn.R.App.P.13(d);Gillockv.BoardofProfessionalResponsibility,656S.W.2d365,367(Tenn.1983);Scruggsv.Bracy,619S.W.2d101(Tenn.1981).  Regardingthefirstissue,Dockerysoughttointroducecertaindocumentsintoevidenceatthehearinginthetrialcourt.Thetrialcourtsustainedtheobjectiontotheiradmissiononhearsaygrounds.Rulingsontheintroductionofevidenceareusuallywithinthediscretionofthetrialjudgeandwillnotbereversedexceptforanabuseofthatdiscretion.Statev.Campbell,904S.W.2d608,116(Tenn.1995);Statev.Baker,785S.W.2d132,134(Tenn.Crim.App.1989);seealsoTenn.R.Evid.104.Weareunabletoconcludethatthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretioninrefusingtoadmittheprofferedevidence.  Evenso,wehaveexaminedthequestioneddocumentsinlightofDockerysimplicationthathedisbursedfundsinpaymentofDaltonsmedicalbillsforwhichhehasreceivednocredit.Thedocumentsprofferedarenotintheleastprobativeofthisimplication,andthetrialcourtsrulingontheiradmissibilitywaseminentlycorrect.̜  Indecidingwhatdisciplinetoimpose,thetrialcourtconsidered,inadditiontotheotherevidence,thefollowingfactorssubmittedbytheBoardasaggravatingfactors:0 0 8 (1)8 Dockeryspriordisciplinaryoffenses;0 0 8 (2)8 Dockeryspatternofmisconduct;0 0 8 (3)8 Dockerysbadfaithobstructionofthedisciplinaryproceedingbyintentionallyfailingtocomplywithdisciplinaryrulesororders;̀0 0 8 (4)8 Dockeryssubmissionoffalseevidence,falsestatements,orotherdeceptivepracticesduringthedisciplinaryprocess;0 0 8 (5)8 Dockerysrefusaltoacknowledgethewrongfulnatureofhisconduct;0 0 8 (6) thevulnerabilityofDockerysvictim;0 0 8 (7)8 Dockeryssubstantiallegalexperience;0 0 8 (8)8 Dockerysindifferencetomakingrestitution. ;     Aspreviouslystated,thetrialcourtsuspendedDockeryslicensetopracticelawfortwoyears.AlthoughDockeryhasnotdirectlychallengedthesuspension,hehasreferredtoitinaratherobliquemanner.Hehasfailed,however,tobrieftheissueordiscussit.  Thetrialcourtimposedtwoconditionsforreinstatement;Dockerychallengesboth.ThefirstconditionrequiresthatDockerypayDaltonthesumof$1,500;DockerymaintainsthathedoesnotoweDaltonthatamount.Weareunabletodeterminefromtherecordbeforeushowtheamountof$1,500wasderived.However,therecorddoesamplydemonstratethatDockeryhasfailedtopayoraccountforallsumsowingtoDalton.WecalculatetheamountDockeryowesDaltontobe$1788. <   כ̛̜  Regardingthesecondconditionofreinstatement,Dockeryarguesthat requiring[him]toattendaTennesseelawschoolisnotwithinthepowerofneitherthepetitionerortheBoardofProfessionalResponsibility.Thiswouldrequiretheparticipationofapartynotinarelationshiptoeither[himself]ortheBoardandisunreasonable.Ampleprecedentexistsforconditioningreinstatementuponfurtherlegaleducation. =   כSee,e.g.,BoardofProfessionalResponsibilityv.Bonnington,762S.W.2d568,570(Tenn.1988)(alawyersuspendedforoneyearormoremustprovebyclearandconvincingevidencethatthelawyerhasthemoralqualifications,competency,andlearninginlawrequiredforadmissiontopracticeandthathisresumptionofthepracticeoflawwillnotbedetrimentaltotheintegrityandstandingofthebarortheadministrationofjustice);DisciplinaryCounselexrel.BoardofProfessionalResponsibilityv.Davis,696S.W.2d528(Tenn.1985)(takingofbarexaminationconditiontoreinstatement).  Inlightoftherecordbeforeusandapplicablelaw,weareunabletoconcludethattheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourtsfindings,exceptastothesanctionrequiringpaymentof$1,500toDalton.Accordingly,weenterjudgmentagainstDockeryinfavorofDaltonintheamountof$1,788,whichjudgmentmustbesatisfiedasaconditionofreinstatement.Inallotherrespects,thejudgmentisaffirmed.     ________________________________________     ADOLPHOA.BIRCH,JR.,ChiefJustice̛̜CONCUR:̜Drowota,Anderson,Reid,White,JJ.̀