Attorney Joanne Engum was hired by Janis Alston to represent her daughter Rhonda Alston against charges pending against her in 2002 and to expunge a 1995 conviction from her record. Attorney Engum charged a flat fee of $2,500 for the 2002 charges and $500 for the expungement. On February 1, 2010 the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (“ODC”) received a complaint from Rhonda Alston against Attorney Engum for not representing her and that she did not communicate with her or return her money.
ODC investigated the claims against Attorney Engum and found that Engum failed to communicate with her client or inform her on how she intended to fight the charges. Ms. Alston attempted to contact Engum on many occasions but Engum failed to return her calls and made no attempts to contact Alston. Engum moved her offices at least three times without informing her client.
When Alston tracked down Engum she was working in another office and at that time Engum told Ms. Alston she would have someone else take the case and would get back to her with the information. Engum never got back to Alston and that was the last time Alston talked to Engum.
Alston sent a certified letter to Engum, which Alston signed for, asking her the status of her case but still did not hear from Engum. When Ms. Alston was turned down for employment because of the information on the background check that was not expunged from her record Alston filed a suit against Engum. ODC has sent certified letters to Engum to investigate the claims but Engum have never responded. Formal charges were filed on July 14, 2010 and mailed to Engum. (www.ladb.org/Engum,Joanne)
ODC has investigated the claims against Ms. Engum and found that this was not the first time that she failed to represent a client, Engum (1) had a similar disciplinary action filed against her in past years which she was sanctioned to one year and one day suspension plus restitution. After investigation of this case the ODC finds that Engum failed to communicate with her client, failed to refund unearned fees, failed to cooperate with ODC investigation and failed to return unearned fees upon termination or representation.
Engum violated Rules of Professional conduct 1.3 (diligence); 1.4 (communication); 1.5(f)(5)(failure to return unearned fees); 1.16(d)(refund an unearned fee upon termination of the representation); and 8.4(a)(violated the Rules of Professional Conduct). October 19, 2010, ODC filed a Motion to Declare Factual Allegations Deemed Admitted. November 5, 2010 an order was signed by the hearing committee chair finding allegations deemed admitted and proven by clear and convincing evidence pursuant to Louisiana Supreme Court Rule XIX, Section 11(E)(3). Engum had twenty days to respond and did not respond. ODC filed its submission on sanctions on January 4, 2011.
Engum (I) encompass the misconduct in Engum (II) therefor, Engum should be adjudged guilty of additional violations to fall under the sanction in Engum I – one year and one day suspension plus restitution and that will be added to her record and considered in the event she makes application for reinstatement in Louisiana.
No comments:
Post a Comment