Attorney Grievance Commission v. Moore
152 A.3d 639
| Md. | 2017Background
- Richard A. Moore II, admitted 1990, left long public-prosecutor career to solo civil practice in 2009; placed on exempt status as an Administrative Law Judge in March 2013.
- Cynthia Covington retained Moore (contingency retainer) after a 2012 auto accident; she authorized settlement and provided medical records and GEICO contact information.
- Moore performed little or no work on the claim: delayed sending a letter of representation, never requested medical records despite authorization, made no settlement demand, and failed to keep Covington reasonably informed.
- Moore began ALJ job March 12, 2013, failed to timely notify Covington or opposing insurer that he was withdrawing, failed to provide her file or identify successor counsel, and ignored multiple calls/emails through Sept. 2013.
- Covington later retained another attorney and successfully settled; she filed a Bar Counsel complaint in Feb. 2014.
- Hearing judge found multiple MLRPC violations including competence, diligence, communication, termination duties, and misrepresentation; this Court affirmed most violations but rejected findings that Moore knowingly lied to Bar Counsel and that his false statements were intentional.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Bar Counsel) | Defendant's Argument (Moore) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Moore violated Rule 1.1 (competence) by virtually doing no work on the matter | Moore’s failure to pursue the claim, obtain records, or make demands amounted to incompetent representation | Lack of diligence alone isn’t incompetence; some records were provided and case was simple | Court: Violation of Rule 1.1 affirmed (complete failure of representation supports incompetence) |
| Whether Moore violated Rule 1.2(a) & 1.3 (scope/diligence) by ignoring client settlement instructions and failing to advance the claim | Moore ignored repeated client directives to settle and took no steps to advance claim | Moore claims delayed receipt of full records and transition to ALJ limited actions | Court: Violations of Rules 1.2(a) and 1.3 affirmed (clear pattern of neglect) |
| Whether Moore knowingly lied to Bar Counsel (Rule 8.1) and engaged in dishonest conduct (Rule 8.4(c)) | Bar Counsel: Moore misrepresented timing/content of terminal communications and that he ‘‘heard nothing’’ from Covington | Moore: Poor records, faulty recollection, and negligent (not knowing) misstatements; he did eventually respond and cooperated | Court: No clear-and-convincing evidence of knowing falsehoods; violations of 8.1(a)/(b) and 8.4(c) not sustained (misstatements deemed negligent) |
| Whether Moore violated Rules 1.4 and 1.16 (communication/termination) and 8.4(d) (prejudicial conduct) | Moore failed to keep client informed, failed to timely withdraw or transfer, failed to return file or notify insurer; conduct harms public confidence | Moore concedes violations of 1.4 and 1.16 and points to lack of client prejudice (successful later settlement) | Court: Violations of 1.4(a),(b), 1.16(a),(d) and 8.4(d) affirmed (communication/termination obligations breached; conduct prejudicial to administration of justice) |
Key Cases Cited
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Blair, 102 A.3d 786 (standard for review and competence analysis)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Mooney, 753 A.2d 17 (clear-and-convincing requirement for knowing misrepresentation; sanction precedent)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Guida, 891 A.2d 1085 (incompetence found where attorney did no work for client)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Pinno, 85 A.3d 159 (disbarment for pattern of neglect, multiple clients, misappropriation and lack of participation in disciplinary process)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Landeo, 132 A.3d 196 (indefinite suspension for multiple competence, diligence, communication failures without disbarment-level misconduct)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Khandpur, 25 A.3d 165 (indefinite suspension with short sit‑out when misrepresentation was negligent rather than knowing)