Complaints on lawyers often stay undisclosed

August 21, 2008

Nashville attorney David Danner fought for his client by filing an employment discrimination lawsuit and winning a settlement on her behalf.

But the client, dissatisfied with the outcome and her communication with Danner, filed a complaint against him with the Board of Professional Responsibility, the Tennessee board that disciplines lawyers.

Danner received a private informal admonition in March 2006 and he is now fighting the disciplinary board, calling for a judicial review in Chancery Court.

If Danner had not challenged his discipline in court there would have been no public record to show he had been privately admonished.

In Tennessee, the public doesn't have the right to know whether a lawyer was privately reprimanded or admonished by the disciplinary board.

The public is only made aware after a lawyer is publicly censured, suspended or disbarred. It's yet another battle between the public's right to know and the rights of an individual.

Some say when an attorney is privately reprimanded or privately admonished for misconduct it doesn't adequately protect the public and erodes trust in the legal system.

A Nashville case involving the arrest of pregnant, illegal immigrant Juana Villegas garnered national media attention and ignited concerns about the way Tennessee disciplines lawyers.

After Villegas was arrested during a traffic stop, her husband unwittingly hired a Nashville lawyer who is facing disbarment.

Transparency should be the goal, says James Turner, executive director for HALT, Help Abolish Legal Tyranny, a national nonprofit organization in Washington, D.C., which advocates legal reform.

"Our view is it should always be open," says Turner, a lawyer since 1979. "There is no adequate way to get the word out on anyone being censured. There are people who don't speak Internet and the other issue is that keeping it under wraps is a major injustice to legal consumers.

"Without transparency there's no public confidence, effectiveness, honesty and forthrightness," Turner added.

Danner doesn't approve of a full open record. He says full disclosure can affect the attorney-client privilege in some instances.

"There should be some limited ability to keep things confidential," Danner said. "We have to strike that balance with the attorney-client privilege. Some clients will want to keep the matter private."

Client endured difficulty

Tennessee's Board of Professional Responsibility tracks complaints and issues private reprimands and admonitions. In 2006, there were 99 private reprimands and admonitions, and 43 public censures. In 2005, there were 98 private reprimands and admonitions. Thirty-five censures were public, according to the board.

Nancy Jones, chief disciplinary counsel for the state's Board of Professional Responsibility, says a private reprimand or admonition is for minor infractions that don't negatively affect a case.

Public censures are for harsher offenses or can arise from repeated complaints.

In other states, Missouri for example, private admonitions are open records for three years then the documents are closed to the public.

"Anyone can ask for attorney records," said Alan Pratzel, chief disciplinary counsel in Missouri. "There are people who think it should be more open or people who think the rules are too open."

But not everyone knows where to look for the information even if it is available.

Donald Johnson, of Nashville, did not know about lawyer Michael Sneed's public censures and didn't know he could look up his record with the Board of Professional Responsibility online.

Johnson filed a complaint in February against Sneed stemming from his breach of contract case in civil court in May 2007. Sneed is fighting his disbarment on separate cases and suing the disciplinary board for taking "arbitrary and capricious'' action against him. But as he appeals to keep his law license, Sneed can practice.

Johnson said he had difficulty reaching Sneed.

"I didn't know what was going on," Johnson said. "I had to keep calling and keep calling."

Johnson had agreed to pay $2,200 from a $3,800 judgment against him.

Johnson said he asked Sneed to file an extension but it was never filed. Johnson was found in default and had to pay the full amount.

Johnson said he learned about Sneed's public censures - in 1993, 1994, 2000 and 2002 for neglecting clients - after reading a Tennessean story about Sneed's representation of Villegas.

Attorney rebuts claim

Villegas' family has accused Sneed of ignoring phone calls from the woman's husband who had paid Sneed $750. Sneed said he was hired to secure the woman's release from jail not represent her in court. He said he did not dodge the husband's phone calls and offered to return the money.

There are a lot of clients who demand attention but don't want to pay for the time, Sneed said.

"I have a lot of clients, and I respond as soon as I can," Sneed said. "I get a lot of calls, and I can't respond to every single phone call right away. We did not avoid phone calls. When he (the husband) didn't want to take the money, I interpret that to mean he was satisfied with the job."

Elliott Ozment, who now represents the woman, said there should be a provision to shield the public from lawyers who are in the process of being disbarred and suspected of engaging in misconduct.

But there has not been a groundswell from the public to revamp the system, said Scott Sims, president of the Nashville Bar Association. "These decisions to censure are not done in a vacuum," Sims said.

But there should be consistent punishment in the disciplinary system and it may have to be addressed by the General Assembly, Danner said.

"In my case, I got my client more money than the case was worth," he said. "But I got disciplined for her allegation. There are lawyers who keep the settlement (money), who don't file on time, and who don't show up to court. There has to be some sort of due process."

To know if a lawyer has been disciplined, go to the Board of Responsibility's Web site, tbpr.org.