Narrative Opinion Summary
In this disciplinary proceeding, the court reviewed allegations of professional misconduct against an attorney, arising from his representation of a client in a wrongful discharge lawsuit. The attorney, retained in 1987 to pursue claims against a municipality and a local union, failed to comply with discovery demands for medical records and authorizations, leading to a motion to compel and subsequent sanctions. Despite the court's order to produce the documents, the attorney did not oppose the motion, resulting in an order barring the introduction of medical evidence unless provided by a specified date. The attorney's continued noncompliance and lack of communication with his client led to additional procedural complications and ultimately the client's decision to seek new legal representation. The Special Referee sustained all nine charges of misconduct under the Code of Professional Responsibility, which were confirmed by the court. The attorney was sanctioned $1,500 for each defendant and suspended from the practice of law for two years, effective after his current suspension. He may apply for reinstatement upon fulfilling certain conditions, including adherence to professional conduct standards throughout the suspension period.
Legal Issues Addressed
Consequences of Non-Opposition to Motionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The respondent's failure to oppose the motion to compel disclosure resulted in an order barring the introduction of medical reports unless provided by a set date.
Reasoning: The respondent did not oppose the defendants’ motion, leading to an order on July 22, 1994, by Justice H. Patrick Leis, III, that barred Mr. Guadagna from introducing medical reports unless they were provided to the defendants by July 28, 1994.
Failure to Comply with Discovery Demandssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The respondent's failure to produce medical records and authorizations as demanded in discovery led to a motion to compel disclosure and sanctions.
Reasoning: In January 1990, the respondent received discovery demands, including requests for medical records and authorizations from Guadagna, which he failed to produce.
Professional Misconduct under Code of Professional Responsibilitysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The respondent was charged with nine counts of professional misconduct, all of which were upheld by the Special Referee and confirmed by the court.
Reasoning: The court addressed nine allegations of professional misconduct against the respondent, all stemming from a common set of facts. The Special Referee upheld all charges.
Sanctions for Professional Misconductsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The respondent was sanctioned $1,500 for each defendant due to his failure to comply with court orders regarding medical records.
Reasoning: Judge Leis denied the defendants' motion to dismiss and vacated the prior order regarding the medical records, imposing a $1,500 sanction on the respondent for each defendant, which remains unpaid.
Suspension from Legal Practicesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The respondent was suspended from practicing law for two years, with conditions for reinstatement, following a history of disciplinary actions.
Reasoning: Jeffrey Kaufman is suspended from practicing law for two years, beginning after his current suspension ends. He may apply for reinstatement six months prior to the two-year period's conclusion.