Lawyer Discipline Rates 'B-'

Connecticut Law Tribune - March 13, 2006

The Statewide Grievance Committee "does not shine in any one category"; nonetheless a Washington, D.C., national legal reform organization ranked it with a B-minus, "the most effective system of attorney discipline in the nation."

The evaluations of lawyer disciplinary organizations nationwide were released March 1 by HALT, a self-described "Organization Of Americans For Legal Reform." The 50,000-member association - founded in 1978 - claims to be the largest and oldest such legal redress group in the country. Its mission is "to challenge the legal establishment to improve access and reduce costs in our civil justice system at both the state and federal levels."

HALT concluded: "Connecticut is among the ten states meting out the most sanctions [or penalties] each year, and one of the few states that does not impose closed door [discipline]. Unlike most states, Connecticut allows complainants to appeal [statewide committee summary] dismissal rulings."

However, the system does not, as it used to, allow consumer appeals of local district committee dismissals of complaints against attorneys. Local grievance panels around Connecticut first rule on probable cause of a complaint and, if probable cause is found, send it on to a statewide committee for its own final ruling.

Despite HALT's praise of Connecticut's openness, a so-called reform of the system in 2001 now deems secret even any repetitious dismissed complaints against a single lawyer.

"Connecticut disciplinary officials bring formal charges against attorneys within three months of receiving complaints," said the HALT report, "and issue sanctions within eight months of receiving complaints." When compared with lawyer complaint handling by other states, this is expeditious, said the HALT report card.

A 2004 Hartford Courant investigation, however, showed that, in the preceding three years, the Statewide Grievance Committee deliberated a year or more before issuing presentments to seven Connecticut lawyers with the most serious misconduct records. Those seven accounted for 71 complaints, all occurring before the reforms to the state grievance system were put in place.

The HALT report did say Connecticut "still needs improvement," because only one-third of the members of each local grievance committee are nonlawyers. The rest of the committee is dominated by attorneys.

Thirty five percent of HALT's rating is based on the adequacy of a system's discipline of lawyers. Another 15 percent each is assigned to publicity and responsiveness to the public; openness of the process; fairness of disciplinary procedures; and public participation. Five percent of the rating is based on agency promptness in handling and rendering rulings.

Connecticut received a C-minus for adequacy of discipline, a C-plus for publicity and responsiveness, a B for openness, a C-plus for fairness, a C for public participation and a B for prompt rulings.

Repeated legal consumer and lawyer complaints about mishandling of inquiries into lawyer ethical and legal misconduct has led to several reforms of the system since the early 1980s, when a Hartford Probate Court scandal induced its total revamping. That change converted the local county grievance system into the Statewide Grievance Committee, an attempt to prevent alleged cronyism, or local lawyers judging colleagues.

Scores more consumer complaints about Connecticut's lawyer disciplinary system in the 1990s led to a special oversight commission inquiry. Some five years ago, that commission submitted a list of 10 proposed changes to the system, and after many months' delay, the state's judges finally approved them.

With those changes came a change of leadership and one added leadership post. Michael Bowler became the new bar counsel prosecuting most complaints. And, Mark Dubois was appointed to the new post as chief disciplinary counsel, moving expeditiously to prosecute the most serious cases and represent complainants in court.

Asked for his reaction to HALT's rating, Dubois, giving full credit to Bowler for HALT's kudos, said: "It doesn't surprise me. Mike Bowler has just opened the doors making it easier for the public to get information and to file complaints."

Dubois attributed Connecticut's B-minus grade - in a three-way tie for the highest grade nationally - to HALT's "anti-lawyer focus." But he conceded that HALT's historical criticism of lawyer grievance-system problems in Connecticut and elsewhere are rational, especially from the consumers' viewpoint.

In 2002, HALT ranked Connecticut's grievance system among the top four nationwide, although its overall grade of "C" left that system open to "significant improvement."

In 2006, Arizona's and Colorado's systems, like Connecticut's, received a B-minus overall. Florida, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Vermont received C-plus ratings. Utah received the lowest grade, an F. North Carolina was next lowest with a D.