In Matter of Easton , M.E., a New York lawyer, faced four charges of professional misconduct.
The first two arose out of his representation of Maria Scarpati's minor daughter in a personal injury action. M.E. "neglected a legal matter entrusted to him," by failing to timely file a summons and complaint against the high schools allegedly responsible for the minor's injuries. Further, M.E. had engaged in "dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation," when he "misled Ms. Scarpati as to the true status of her legal matter."
M.E.'s next two charges arose out of his representation of Jeneva McLean-Yao, M.E. again "neglected" a matter by failing to "conduct an inquest on the scheduled date," resulting in the case being removed from the inquest calendar. M.E. again engaged in dishonesty when he misled McLean-Yao as to the "true status of her legal matter."
Disciplinary proceedings against M.E. were filed in 2001, but were delayed until 2005 by the Grievance Committee for the Tenth Judicial District which required that M.E. undergo three psychiatric examinations.During that time, M.E. was suspended from the practice of law. Finally, in May 2007, a Special Referee found M.E. responsible for all four charges against him and recommended the attorney be censured for his misconduct.
On review, the Appellate Division, Second Department, concurred with the Referee's findings since none of M.E.'s lapses were "venal in nature." (M.E. was supposedly unable to interact with his clients due to "mental illness" -- an "anxiety disorder evidenced by his depression and obsessive compulsive behavior.")
Since he was perceived as "honest, candid, and remorseful," had been suspended for six years, and his clients compensated for their losses, the AD2 found a mere public censure to be an appropriate punishment in this instance.
Is it good to be M.E.?
To download a copy of the Appellate Division's decision, please use this link: Matter of Easton