Board of Professional Responsibility, Wyoming State Bar v. Stacy E. Casper, Wsb No. 6-3431, 2014 WY 22

Background

Stacy E. Casper represented a client in a divorce/custody matter under a written Legal Services Agreement (LSA) with a 15-minute minimum billing increment and a $200/hr office rate; client paid a $5,000 retainer.
Casper withdrew in January 2013 for nonpayment; the client proceeded pro se; divorce decree entered April 30, 2013, requiring sale of marital property owned of record by the ex-husband.
On May 13, 2013 Casper filed a recorded “Lien Statement” asserting $18,717.05, attaching the LSA and unredacted billing ledger; she filed under a statute for property improvements (§ 29-1-312) rather than the attorney-lien statute and did not give statutorily required notice to the property owner.
Casper’s billing practices included duplicate charges, billing for tasks not performed or billed twice, routine 15-minute charges for brief acts (signing one-page documents), and some after-the-fact entries; she acknowledged many of these errors and stipulated violations.
The Board charged violations of WY Rules of Professional Conduct 1.5 (unreasonable fees), 1.9(c) (use/reveal of former-client confidences to client’s disadvantage), and 8.4(c) (dishonesty/misrepresentation); Casper stipulated to the findings and discipline recommendation.
The Supreme Court accepted the stipulation, found violations, and ordered a 30-day suspension (effective Aug 1, 2014), restitution of the ex-husband’s attorney fees, payment of administrative fees and costs, a CLE teaching requirement on billing, and issuance of a press release.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Excessive/unreasonable fees (Rule 1.5)	Casper billed for time not actually expended, billed duplicate entries, and abused 15-minute minimums, making fees unreasonable.	Casper relied on the LSA authorizing 15-minute minimums and her hourly rate; minimum increments are permissible if not abused.	Court: Violations of Rule 1.5 — minimum increments permissible but here were abused; billed for work not performed and failed to exercise billing judgment.
Misrepresentation in filing lien (Rule 8.4(c))	Casper filed a sworn Lien Statement asserting inaccurate charges, used the wrong statutory basis, and failed to notify the property owner; filing a patently inaccurate sworn document is misrepresentation.	Casper argued contract authorized liens and she claimed fees; but did not justify statutory basis or notice omission.	Court: Violated Rule 8.4(c); lien filing was improper, inaccurate, and misleading.
Breach of confidentiality (Rule 1.9(c))	Casper attached complete billing records and LSA to a publicly recorded lien, revealing confidential former-client information without authorization.	Casper could disclose information to collect a legitimate fee, and the LSA authorized recording the agreement; disclosure was unnecessary because claimed fees were not supported.	Court: Violated Rule 1.9(c); disclosure not justified because claimed fees were unreasonable and lien filing improper.
Appropriate sanction	Board: Apply ABA Standards considering duty violated, mental state (knowingly), injury/potential injury, aggravating and mitigating factors; recommend 30-day suspension plus restitution, costs, CLE teaching.	Casper stipulated and cooperated, acknowledging violations and mitigation (no prior discipline, restitution efforts, remorse).	Court: Adopted stipulated recommendation (30-day suspension, restitution to ex-husband, $500 admin fee and costs, CLE requirement, press release).

Key Cases Cited

In re Clark, 613 P.2d 1218 (Wyo. 1980) (discipline preserves integrity of the bar)
Attorney Grievance Comm’n of Maryland v. Walman, 374 A.2d 354 (Md. 1977) (purpose of disciplinary proceedings)
Bd. of Prof’l Responsibility v. Davidson, 205 P.3d 1008 (Wyo. 2009) (Board is an arm of the court; court makes ultimate discipline decision)
Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (U.S. 1983) (lodestar method for reasonableness of fees)
UNC Teton Exploration Drilling, Inc. v. Peyton, 774 P.2d 584 (Wyo. 1989) (adoption of lodestar concept in Wyoming)
In re O’Brien, 29 P.3d 1044 (N.M. 2001) (any fee is excessive when no services are provided)
Bevan v. Fix, 42 P.3d 1013 (Wyo. 2002) (attorney’s fiduciary duties and confidentiality to former clients)
Sue Davidson, P.C. v. Naranjo, 904 P.2d 354 (Wyo. 1995) (liens attach only to property owned by the debtor)
Ringolsby v. Johnson, 193 P.3d 1167 (Wyo. 2008) (billing records may be necessary to establish fee reasonableness)
Mendicino v. Whitchurch, 565 P.2d 460 (Wyo. 1977) (court’s ultimate judgment in discipline cases)