257 N.C. App. 121
N.C. Ct. App.2017Background
- Christopher W. Livingston, a North Carolina attorney, contracted in 2008 with Credit Collections Defense Network (CCDN/CCDN, LLC) to accept client referrals and provide legal services while CCDN collected fees and would remit a portion to him.
- Livingston learned in April 2008 that CCDN was preparing pleadings for pro se filing and thus engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, but he continued the referral relationship and accepted additional CCDN clients.
- Livingston filed multiple suits (state and federal) against CCDN and numerous individuals and law firms between 2008–2011; several suits were dismissed for failure to join CCDN, LLC or for lack of personal jurisdiction, and the federal court dismissed claims against certain lawyer-defendants as legally unsupported.
- Livingston left voicemail threats to a South Carolina attorney and amended a federal complaint to add several opposing lawyers and firms despite having no reasonable factual or legal basis to sue them; he also filed a putative class action but stated he would not provide class notice himself.
- The North Carolina State Bar charged Livingston with multiple Rules of Professional Conduct violations; after hearings the Disciplinary Hearing Commission (DHC) suspended his license for five years, with a possible stay after two years. Livingston appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the disciplinary proceedings violate due process/equal protection? | DHC and process were proper; Livingston received notice and full opportunity to participate. | Livingston claimed no meaningful evidentiary hearing, prosecutorial misconduct, and vague findings. | Court: No constitutional violation; proceeding afforded notice, discovery, testimony, and meaningful hearing. |
| Did Livingston violate fee-sharing and assist in unauthorized practice (Rules 5.4, 5.5/8.4)? | State Bar: Livingston entered a fee-sharing agreement with a nonlawyer entity and continued affiliation after learning CCDN practiced law illegally. | Livingston argued an agreement is not an attempt and contested factual basis. | Court: Findings supported—agreement contemplated fee-sharing (attempt), and continuing affiliation after knowledge assisted CCDN’s unauthorized practice. |
| Did Livingston file/maintain frivolous or prejudicial lawsuits and threats against lawyers (Rules 3.1, 4.1, 4.4, 8.4)? | State Bar: He filed suits in forums lacking jurisdiction, failed to join necessary parties, threatened counsel, added opposing lawyers without basis, and filed class claims while refusing to provide notice—conduct prejudicial to administration of justice. | Livingston disputed sufficiency/authentication of evidence and intent. | Court: Substantial evidence supported findings of frivolous and coercive filings, false statements to third parties, and use of litigation to burden/embarrass—violations upheld. |
| Was the five-year suspension (stay possible after two years) excessive? | State Bar: Suspension supported by whole-record test given harm to lawyers, clients, and administration of justice; prior sanctions and costly defenses justify discipline. | Livingston argued findings unsupported so discipline excessive. | Court: Discipline affirmed—DHC findings showed significant or potentially significant harm and disciplinary factors justified five-year suspension with conditions. |
Key Cases Cited
- Talford v. N.C. State Bar, 356 N.C. 626 (N.C. 2003) (articulates whole‑record test and standards for review of disciplinary findings and dispositional phase)
- Palmer (In re Suspension of Palmer), 296 N.C. 638 (N.C. 1979) (requires clear, cogent, and convincing evidence in attorney disciplinary proceedings)
- Rogers (In re Rogers), 297 N.C. 48 (N.C. 1979) (framework for determining whether lower body's decision has rational basis in evidence)
- Gardner v. N.C. State Bar, 316 N.C. 285 (N.C. 1986) (corporations may not practice law or hold themselves out as entitled to provide legal services)
- Coble v. State, 351 N.C. 448 (N.C. 2000) (elements for criminal attempt used analogously to evaluate attempted violation)
- Taylor v. Bettis, 976 F. Supp. 2d 721 (E.D.N.C. 2013) (federal dismissal of claims against lawyer-defendants where plaintiffs lacked factual/legal basis)