Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kentucky Bar Association v. Schaffner

Supreme Court of Kentucky

April 2, 2015

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION MOVANT
v.
CHARLES H. SCHAFFNER RESPONDENT

OPINION AND ORDER

As a result of conduct during his representation of clients in forty-five bankruptcy cases, Respondent Charles H. Schaffner, KBA Member No. 83759, [1]was charged by the Inquiry Commission in KBA File 19887 with multiple violations of the standards of professional conduct. For the reasons explained below, we adopt the findings and conclusions of the trial commissioner that Respondent violated each of the counts as charged by the Inquiry Commission. We also accept the trial commissioner's recommended sanction of a 180-day suspension from the practice of law.

I. BACKGROUND

In 2010, after twenty years of handling primarily criminal law and personal injury cases, Respondent resumed the practice of bankruptcy law. In connection with his practice, Respondent and his new law partner, Ed Lucas, employed Leonard Bickers to assist in the preparation and filing of the office's bankruptcy cases. Bickers was a convicted felon, and both he and Lucas had what the trial commissioner described as a history of "prior difficulties with the Federal Bankruptcy Courts."

During 2010 and 2011, Respondent's office filed forty-five bankruptcy petitions. Bickers was given broad access to both office and client funds, and broad independence in processing the bankruptcy filings. At some point Bickers began defrauding clients and converting the fees they paid to his own use. In addition, deficiencies in Bickers's work resulted in adverse consequences for some clients, including dismissals of their petitions. Bickers failed to maintain accurate records of money collected from the clients. Clients were not given accurate receipts for the fees they paid, and the client funds were not deposited into a client trust account as required under the applicable rules.

While Bickers conducted his nefarious work, Respondent was suffering through difficult personal problems involving his family and health. When, belatedly, he became aware of the seriousness of the problem caused by Bickers, he took appropriate action, some of which is described below. Bickers and Lucas, however, absconded with the computer containing clients' bankruptcy information and sensitive personal data. As a result of these problems, Respondent was disbarred from bankruptcy court practice.

II. CHARGES

Appellant was charged by the Inquiry Commission with the following violations:[2]

Count I: SCR 3.130-1.1 by providing incompetent representation to the bankruptcy clients;

Count II: SCR 3.130-1.15(a) by failing to deposit client funds into a trust account and/or by failing to keep complete records of such account funds;

Count III: SCR 3.130-1.15(b) by failing to promptly deliver to clients or former clients funds to which they were entitled and/or by failing to render a full accounting to those clients regarding their fees paid to Respondent and/or his assistant Leonard Bickers, who was hired to perform various Bankruptcy related duties;

Count IV: SCR 1.130-5.3(a) by failing to ensure that his firm or practice had in effect measures which gave reasonable assurance to non-lawyer assistants, such as Bickers, that their conduct was compatible with Respondent's professional obligations;

Count V: SCR 3.130-5.3(b) by failing to make reasonable efforts to ensure that Bickers's conduct was compatible with Respondent's professional obligations as a lawyer;

Count VI: SCR 3.130-5.3(c)(2) by having direct supervisory authority over Bickers and being made aware of his conduct or misconduct but failing to take timely, reasonable, ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.