Court: Illinois Supreme Court; May 16, 1978; Illinois; State Supreme Court
On June 23, 1976, Joseph L. Dombrowski was charged with professional misconduct by the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission for settling a personal injury case without his client's consent and forging her signature on related documents. The allegations included that he misrepresented to an inquiry panel that he had a valid power of attorney when in fact he had signed the document himself. The hearing panel found substantial evidence supporting these claims and recommended an 18-month suspension, which was upheld by the Review Board.
Dombrowski represented Virginia Finley, who was injured on an Amtrak train. After a verbal agreement in early 1972 for a one-third contingency fee, Dombrowski negotiated a $1,000 settlement with the railroad. He informed Finley of the offer, and although she initially agreed, she later refused to sign the release after learning her net amount would be only $244. Dombrowski, asserting she had not provided further instructions, signed her name to the release and deposited the settlement check without notifying her. Finley subsequently filed a complaint against him on February 7, 1974. In his defense, Dombrowski claimed that Finley had consented to the settlement and presented documents purportedly signed by both parties, including a retainer agreement and power of attorney dated February 14, 1972.
After the hearing, the Administrator requested the original power of attorney, revealing that Dombrowski had mistakenly signed Mrs. Finley's name himself. In April 1975, he informed the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission and submitted a polygraph report indicating he was unaware of this when he signed. Dombrowski was the only witness before the Hearing Board, testifying that Mrs. Finley verbally agreed to a settlement in mid-1973 but later rejected it upon learning her net recovery would only be $244 from a $1,000 settlement. He claimed to have believed he was authorized to sign the release due to the power of attorney, which he assumed was valid. Dombrowski acted to protect her interests, citing an impending statute of limitations. However, he acknowledged he only realized the power of attorney was not signed by Mrs. Finley when prompted by the Administrator. His polygraph evidence was not admitted. The Hearing Board found Dombrowski acted improperly by settling against his client's wishes and signing her name without authority but did not prove he prepared the power of attorney to mislead the board. The board recommended an 18-month suspension, which the Review Board affirmed. Dombrowski characterized the case as a disagreement over settlement division, asserting Mrs. Finley initially agreed but later objected only to the amount. The court disagreed, stating that while she initially consented, she refused to finalize the settlement upon learning her recovery amount. The court reiterated that unauthorized settlements and endorsements are improper, regardless of Dombrowski's claims about Mrs. Finley being difficult. Furthermore, reliance on the power of attorney was deemed irrelevant given her clear refusal of the settlement.
Even if the power of attorney was valid, Dombrowski's actions in signing Mrs. Finley's name to the release and settlement draft constituted a misuse of the authority granted by the power of attorney. The case references In re Gavin (1961), where an attorney faced similar issues but had evidence that the client had signed the power of attorney. In contrast, Dombrowski admitted that Mrs. Finley never signed it and was unaware of its existence. He claimed his actions were in good faith to protect her interests due to an impending statute of limitations, yet there were still months left before it expired. Dombrowski had multiple options to protect Mrs. Finley’s rights, such as withdrawing from the case or referring her to another attorney, but he chose to act against her wishes. His disregard for her rights and unauthorized actions led to a breach of professional obligations.
Dombrowski argued that the recommended 18-month suspension was excessive, noting his clean record over ten years and the absence of financial loss to Mrs. Finley. However, the Administrator referenced In re Agin (1970), where a similar breach resulted in a one-year suspension. The Administrator also cited parallels with In re Gavin, where the attorney settled without client consent and faced disciplinary action. These precedents support the conclusion that Dombrowski’s misconduct warrants a significant suspension due to the severity of his actions.
Gavin’s testimony was corroborated by witnesses, leading the court to conclude that although he acted improperly, his conduct did not involve moral turpitude, thus deeming censure as appropriate discipline. In the case of In re Di Bella (1974), an attorney misappropriated settlement funds without the client’s consent, resulting in a three-year suspension. Comparatively, Dombrowski’s misconduct, which included settling against his client’s wishes and signing her name to several documents without authorization, warranted a one-year suspension. The court noted discrepancies in the handwriting of the signatures on the documents, indicating unauthorized actions. They reiterated that a power of attorney cannot be used to bypass a client's explicit instructions regarding settlement. Consequently, Dombrowski was suspended from the practice of law for one year. Justice Kluczynski did not participate in the case's consideration or decision.
