150 A.3d 338
Md.2016Background
- Jerome P. Johnson was retained to represent Terrance Venable in an Anne Arundel County child-support matter; Venable paid $1,250 for appearance and later paid $775 for filing exceptions.
- At a December 16, 2013 hearing Johnson said he would file an appearance but never filed it or paid the appearance fee; the exceptions were mailed late and returned because the fee was unpaid; the court closed the case.
- Johnson did not notify Venable of the returned exceptions or the case closure, failed to respond promptly to client communications, and falsely told Venable a motion for reconsideration was pending.
- Venable filed a Bar complaint; Bar Counsel repeatedly requested documents and information in 2014, but Johnson largely failed to respond to multiple lawful demands.
- Bar Counsel filed a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action; Johnson missed answer deadlines, the hearing judge entered default, admitted Bar Counsel’s documentary evidence, and found multiple MLRPC violations.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the findings and imposed a one-year suspension, citing multiple aggravating factors and only the absence of prior discipline as mitigation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the hearing judge properly denied Johnson’s motion to vacate the default | Bar Counsel: motion to vacate was untimely and failed to show a substantial basis to excuse default | Johnson: he delayed answer to preserve pre-answer Rule 2-322 defenses and alleged procedural defects | Denial affirmed — motion untimely, failed to show a substantial controversy or equitable excuse |
| Whether averments in the petition are admissible after default and whether an evidentiary hearing was required | Bar Counsel: default permits treating averments as admitted; limited evidence sufficed | Johnson: contested factual findings and sought fuller hearing/remand | Court: where default not vacated, judge may treat averments as admitted and need not conduct full evidentiary hearing |
| Whether clear and convincing evidence showed violations of MLRPC (diligence, communication, termination, disciplinary response, prejudicial conduct) | Bar Counsel: facts establish violations of 1.3, 1.4(a)(2,3), 1.4(b), 1.16(d), 8.1(b), 8.4(d), 8.4(a) | Johnson: disputed facts and defenses (claimed timely appearance, communications, cooperation) | Affirmed — clear and convincing evidence supported findings of violations (not 1.5(b)) |
| Appropriate sanction for misconduct | Bar Counsel: requested indefinite suspension | Johnson: sought dismissal or at most reprimand/limited suspension | Court: one-year suspension beginning 30 days after opinion filed (multiple aggravating factors, limited mitigation) |
Key Cases Cited
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Lee, 390 Md. 517 (treating petition averments as admitted after default; unnecessary protracted evidentiary hearing)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Steinberg, 395 Md. 337 (averments in petition deemed admitted where no timely responsive pleading)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Lawson, 428 Md. 102 (averments treated as admitted after default; court relied on Rules 2-613 and 2-323)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Thomas, 440 Md. 523 (accepting averments as admitted where default entered; limited need for full evidentiary hearing)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Shuler, 443 Md. 494 (standard of review and review of hearing judge findings)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Gray, 433 Md. 516 (sixty-day suspension for similar communication/diligence and 8.1 violations)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Harris, 366 Md. 376 (six-month suspension for multiple violations including diligence and communication; mitigation for serious personal problems)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Kovacic, 389 Md. 233 (indefinite suspension where lawyer ceased practice and failed to cooperate; contrasted with present facts)