Attorney Grievance Commission v. Thomas
127 A.3d 562
| Md. | 2015Background
- Respondent C. Trent Thomas, admitted 2000, was a solo practitioner who represented Zakary Lee (criminal defense) and Wanda Sue Sines (separation/divorce and guardianship). Both clients paid flat fees in advance.
- Thomas failed to prepare for or attend Lee’s March 4, 2014 hearing, did not interview/subpoena witnesses, did not pursue a civil claim for Lee’s medical expenses, and never refunded Lee’s fee.
- For Sines, Thomas drafted a separation agreement but never filed for divorce, missed the 21-day window to file a guardianship petition based on medical evaluations (requiring re-evaluation), failed to interview witnesses, and did not call witnesses at the guardianship hearing; he refunded some fees only after complaint.
- Thomas entered a Conditional Diversion Agreement with Bar Counsel in 2013 requiring abstinence, counseling, proof of AA attendance, and disclosure of noncompliance; he was discharged twice from treatment for failing to attend and did not inform Bar Counsel of those discharges or ongoing substance use.
- The Attorney Grievance Commission filed disciplinary charges; Thomas repeatedly failed to appear at proceedings and did not contest the hearing judge’s factual findings. The Court of Appeals upheld violations of multiple MLRPC provisions and disbarred Thomas.
Issues
| Issue | Attorney Grievance Comm’n (Plaintiff) | Thomas (Defendant) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Competence & Diligence (MLRPC 1.1, 1.3) | Thomas neglected client matters, failed to prepare or appear, and abandoned representation | No meaningful defense; failed to attend proceedings | Violations proved by clear and convincing evidence |
| Communication & Unreasonable Fees (MLRPC 1.4, 1.5) | Thomas failed to keep clients informed and charged/kept fees despite no meaningful work | No effective response; did not refund until complaint | Violations proven; fees unreasonable because services not performed |
| Termination/Abandonment (MLRPC 1.16(d)) | Thomas abandoned clients without notice or protection of interests | No rebuttal; failed to notify or return unearned fees timely | Violation established (abandonment and failure to protect client interests) |
| Dishonesty in Disciplinary Matter & Prejudice (MLRPC 8.1(b), 8.4(c), 8.4(d)) | Thomas concealed violations of the diversion agreement to continue practicing, harming administration of justice | No contest; withheld discharges and substance use from Bar Counsel | Violations established; dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to administration of justice warranted severe sanction |
Key Cases Cited
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Davy, 435 Md. 674 (2013) (fee unreasonable when lawyer fails to perform services to a meaningful degree)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. De La Paz, 418 Md. 534 (2011) (disbarment appropriate for repeated client neglect and failure to prosecute)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Shuler, 443 Md. 494 (2015) (abandonment of representation and conduct harming public perception violates MLRPC 8.4(d))
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Brigerman, 441 Md. 23 (2014) (dishonesty with Bar Counsel in disciplinary context violates MLRPC 8.4(d))
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Katz, 443 Md. 389 (2015) (intentional dishonest conduct ordinarily warrants disbarment)
- Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Kum, 440 Md. 372 (2014) (abandonment constitutes violation of MLRPC 1.16(d))
Disposition: Court of Appeals affirmed hearing judge’s findings, concluded multiple MLRPC violations, and disbarred Thomas; costs awarded.