No. 1868, Disciplinary Docket No. 3

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner No. 1868 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 No. 110 DB 2012 v. Attorney Registration No. 92637 JILL CAROL CASTELLINI, Respondent (Philadelphia) ORDER PER CURIAM: AND NOW, this 161h day of November, 2012, upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Three-Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board dated August 28, 2012, the Joint Petition in Support of Discipline on Consent is hereby granted pursuant to Rule 215(g), Pa.R.D.E., and it is ORDERED that Jill Carol Castellini is suspended on consent from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of one year and one day and she shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. A True Copy Patricia Nicola As Of 11/16/2012 ~Jb.j Attest: ChiefCier · Supreme Court of Pennsylvania BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL Petitioner v. No.11DDB2012 Attorney Registration No. 92637 JILL CAROL CASTELLINI Respondent (Philadelphia) RECOMMENDATION OF THREE-MEMBER PANEL OF THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA The Three-Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, consisting of Board Members Gabriel L. Bevilacqua, Carl D. Buchholz, Ill, and David E. Schwager, has reviewed the Joint Petition in Support of Discipline on Consent filed in the above-captioned matter on July 23, 2012. The Panel approves the Joint Petition consenting to a one year and one day suspension and recommends to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania that the attached Petition be Granted. The Panel further recommends that any necessary expenses incurred in the investigation and prosecution of this matter shall be paid by the respondent-attorney as a condition to the grant of the Petition. ~~ ' Gabriel L. Bevilacqua, Pane ir The Disciplinary Board of th Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Date: August 28, 2012 BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner ODC File No. C1-12-59 v. Atty. Reg. No. 92637 JILL CAROL CASTELLINI, Respondent (Philadelphia) JOINT PETITION IN SUPPORT OF DISCIPLINE ON CONSENT UNDER Pa.R.D.E. 215(d) Petitioner, Office of Disciplinary Counsel Paul J. Killion, Hernandez, Chief Disciplinary Counsel, Disciplinary Carol Castellini, Counsel, and Samuel C. for/ Respondent, file Discipline Consent on Disciplinary this and Stretton, Joint Under Enforcement by ("ODC"), by and Richard Respondent, Esquire, Petition in Counsel Support of Rule of Pennsylvania ("Pa.R.D.E.") Jill and 215 (d)' respectfully represent that: 1. Petitioner, whose principal office is located at Pennsylvania Judicial Center, Avenue, P.O. invested, duty to Box pursuant 62485, to investigate Suite 2700, Harrisburg, Pa.R.D.E. all 207, matters 601 Commonwe~lth Pennsylvania, with the is power and involving alleged misconduct of any attorney admitted to practice law in the '.!-, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to prospf~ Eti JUL 2 3 2012 Ol!ice of the Secretary The Disciplinarj Board of the Supreme Cout1 ol Pennsylvama disciplinary various proceedings provisions brought in accordance of said Rules of Jill Carol Castellini, with the Disciplinary Enforcement. 2. Respondent, November 6, 1974, Commonwealth on was born on and was admitted to practice law in the May 18, 2004. Respondent was assigned Attorney Registration No. 92637 and is currently registered as "active. 11 3. According Respondent's to public attorney access registration address is 2628 records, Tulip Street, Philadelphia, PA 19125. 4. subject Pursuant to to the Pa.R.D.E. 201(a) (1), disciplinary Respondent jurisdiction of is the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. 5. In connection with ODC File No. C1-12-59, Respondent received a Request for Statement of Respondent's Position (Form DB-7) dated April 23, 2012. 6. counsel, that By letter Samuel Respondent C. dated June Stretton, had agreed 6, Esquire, to 2012, Respondent's advised enter into Petitioner a joint recommendation for consent discipline. 7. By letter dated June 7, 2012, submitted a counseled response to the DB-7 letter. 2 Respondent SPECIFIC FACTUAL ADMISSIONS AND RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT VIOLATED 8. factual Respondent hereby stipulates that allegations referenced violated above, the drawn are charged from true the and Rules of the following DB-7 correct letter, and Professional as that she Conduct and Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement as set forth herein. CHARGE 9. The Pennsylvania Continuing Legal Board ("the CLE Board") assigned Respondent to Compliance Group 1. a. Attorneys assigned to Compliance Group 1 had a deadline of April 30th to comply with the Pennsylvania Continuing Legal Education ("CLE") requirements. 10. at 2628 At all times relevant hereto, Tulip Street, Philadelphia, Respondent resided Pennsylvania ("the Tulip Street address"). a. The zip code for the Tulip Street address is 19125-1827. 11. By Respondent at notice the dated Tulip June Street inter alia: 3 25, 2010, address, the mailed CLE to Board, a. enclosed Respondent's Annual CLE Report, which showed how the CLE courses Respondent had taken years for had the past three been applied Respondent's most recent ending 30, hours April short 2010, compliance and that compliance Respondent of the required the CLE Board's in year, was two twelve credit records showed hours; b. stated that that Respondent was non-compliant with her CLE requirements; c. informed Respondent that a late fee of $100 had been assessed; d. advised Respondent that she had sixty days from the date of the notice to complete the required hours or exception as well to receive an approved as pay any required· fees which had been assessed; and e. informed Respondent that expiration of ninety days the list notice, of the those CLE the from the date of Board would prepare lawyers who non-compliant and assess 4 following continued to a be them an additional $100 late fee and would forward that list. to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. 12. Respondent received the June 25, 2010 notice, with enclosures. 13. By Respondent at notice the dated Tulip September Street 29, 2010, address, mailed. to the CLE Board, records showed inter alia: a. stated that the CLE Board's that Respondent was CLE requirements non-compliant for the with .her compliance year ending April 30, 2010; b. informed Respondent that a second late fee of $100 had been assessed; c. advised Respondent prepar·ing the that list of the process for those lawyers who continued to be non-compliant for submission to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania would be finalized by October 29, 2010; d. urged Respondent "to take action to remedy this situation"; and e. informed Respondent of the consequences that would follow if non-compliance, she as failed well as to address those steps had to take to resume active status. 5 her she 14. received Respondent the September 2010 29' notice, with enclosure. 15. Court By of Order dated December 10, 2010, Pennsylvania placed Respondent suspension pursuant Rules Continuing for to Rule 111(b) Legal the Supreme on administrative of the Education Pennsylvania ("Pa.C.L.E.") for failure to comply with CLE requirements. 16. By sent to Respondent by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the Suzanne Tulip letter Street dated December address, 10, 2010, E. Price, Attorney Registrar: a. served Respondent with a copy of the Order; b. informed Respondent that she was required to comply with Rules Rules of 217 of the Pennsylvania Disciplinary ("Pa.R.D.E.") and Enforcement §§91.91-91.99 of the Disciplinary Board Rules, as enclosed; c. provided Respondent Guidance to Lawyers Administratively Nonlitigation Suspension; with Who Suspended; Notice of Form DB-24(a), of Compliance; 6 Standard have Form been DB-23(a), Administrative Litigation Notice of Administrative Suspension; Statement the Form DB-25 ('a), and a letter prepared the by information CLE regarding Board providing compliance with Rule 111(B), Pa.C.L.E.; and advised Respondent that in order to resume active d. required . to status, she was comply with the CLE Board. 17. On or about January 10, 2011, the Attorney Registration Office received from the United States Postal Service which Ms. was Price's marked December "RETURN 10, 2010 TO SENDER 2011, the certified UNCLAIMED letter, UNABLE TO FORWARD." 18. On January 10, Office re-sent to Respondent Ms. Attorney Registration Price's December 10, 2010 letter, with enclosures, by first class mail. 19. Respondent received Ms. Price's December 10, 2010 letter. 20. Respondent knew that as of January 9, 2011, she was administratively suspended. 21. By Preliminary Annual CLE Report ("Report") dated February 17, 2011, mailed to Respondent at the Tulip Street address, the CLE Board, inter alia: a. stated that Respondent the of 7 Report her was status to with inform the Pennsylvania CLE requirements as of February 3, 2011; b. informed Respondent that the CLE Board's records showed that her CLE requirement for the compliance 2011 because she was year placed was on deferred administrative suspension; and c. alerted Respondent to where she could obtain information practice regarding of law in reinstatement to and Pennsylvania the CLE obligations. 22. Respondent received the February 17, 2011 Report. 23. Respondent knew she that was ineligible to practice law in Pennsylvania by virtue of: a. the June notices 25, and and September February 17, 2010 the 29, 2011 2010 Report that she received from the CLE Board; b. Ms. Price's December 10, 2010 letter ·and enclosures; c. the expiration of Respondent's Pennsylvania attorney's license on July 1, 2010; and d. .Respondent' s failure to obtain a Pennsylvania attorney license after July 1, 2010. 8 24. did Respondent violated Pa.R.D.E. 217(e), in that she not timely (Form file DB-25 (a)) within ten a with days verified the ·after Statement Disciplinary the of Board effective Compliance Secretary date of her administrative suspension. 25. Respondent Lawler, Wilbraham, was & employed as ( "WL&B") Buba an at associate the time at her administrative suspension became effective. 26. associate Respondent at WL&B continued after in her her employment administrative as an suspension became effective. 27. From January 10, 2011 through January 18, 2012, in her capacity as a WL&B associate, Respondent engaged in the unauthorized practice of law by attending hearings in workers' compensation court, workers' compensation matters, discovery court, an mediations attending in hearings in appearing at a settlement conference and argument, oral attending and/or attending depositions connection with the following client matters: 1. SWIF; 2. PHICO Services; 3. PLAN; 4. United States Gypsum; 5. Gallagher Bassett; 9 in 6. ASBESTOS; 7. PECO; 8. Broudy Supply; 9. National Gypsum Company; 10. PFRACP; 11. AH Bennett Company; 12. Athlone Industries; 13. Arvin Meritor; 14. Brake Systems, Inc.; 15. Burnham Boilers; 16. Celanese; 17. CL Zimmerman; 18. Cummins; 19. Case New Holland; 20. Corken, Inc.; 21. CertainTeed Corp.; 22. Curtis Wright; 23. DAP, Inc.; 24. Eggers; 25. Fairbanks Company; 26. Fruehauf; 27. Grinnell Corporation; 28 . Hale Pumps; 29. Heidelberg, Inc.; 10 30. 31. lUNA; 32. JC Penney; 33. Kelsey-Hayes; 34. Lawrence Pumps; 35. Lennox Industries; 36. Mannington Mills; 37. Maremont, Inc.; 38. Nelson Insulation; 39. NOSROC; 40. St. Gobain Abrasives; 41. Rockwell, Inc.; 42. Robertson Seco; 43. Rockwell International; 44. Tabet Manufacturing; 45. Transdigm Group; 46. US Restaurants; 47. Viking Pumps; 48. Wilson Industries; 49. Yarway Valves; 50. Buffalo Pumps; and 51. 28. HM Royal; PLENCO. Respondent failed to .advise her clients in those cases that are set forth in paragraph 27 that: 11 a. she had been administratively suspended; and b. she could not represent them in their legal matters. 29. WL&B On January 13, learned that 2012, the Respondent corporate had officers of placed on been administrative suspension. 30. On January 18, 2012, Respondent's employment at WL&B was terminated. 31. 30 By her conduct as alleged in Paragraphs 9 through above, Respondent violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct and Pennsylvania Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement: a. RPC 1.4(b), which states that a lawyer shall explain a necessary matter to informed to the permit extent the decisions reasonably client to make .the regarding representation; b. RPC 5.5(a), which states that a lawyer shall not practice violation profession of in law the in a jurisdiction regulation that of jurisdiction, the in legal or assist another in doing so; and c. Pa.R.D.E. 203 (b) (3)' wilful violation of 12 which states that a any other provision. of the Enforcement Rules shall be grounds for discipline, via: (1) Pa.R.D.E. 217(b), which states that a formerly admitted attorney shall promptly notify, or cause to be notified, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, all clients who are involved in pending litigation or administrative proceedings, and the attorney or attorneys for each adverse party in such matter or proceeding, of the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer to inactive status and consequent inability of the formerly admitted attorney to act as an attorney after the effective date of the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer to inactive status. The notice to be given to the client shall advise the prompt substitution of another attorney or attorneys in place of the formerly admitted attorney. In the event .the client does not obtain substitute counsel before the effective date of the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer to inactive status, it shall be the responsibility of the formerly admitted attorney to move in the court or agency in which the proceeding is pending for leave to withdraw. The notice to be given to the attorney or attorneys for an adverse party shall state the place of residence of the client of the formerly admitted attorney; (2) Pa.R.D.E. 217(c)(l), which states that a formerly admitted attorney shall promptly notify, or cause to be notified, of the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer to inactive status, by registered or certified mail, return 13 receipt requested all persons or their agents or guardians to whom a fiduciary duty is or may be owed at any time after the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or trans_fer to inactive status. The responsibility of the formerly admitted attorney to provide the notice required by this subdivision shall continue for as long as the formerly admitted attorney is disbarred, suspended, administratively suspended or on inactive status; (3) Pa.R.D.E. 217(c) (2), which states that a formerly admitted attorney shall promptly notify, or cause to be notified, of the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer to inactive status, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested all other persons with whom the formerly admitted attorney may at any time expect to have professional contacts under circumstances where there is a reasonable probability that they may infer that he or she continues as an attorney in good standing. The responsibility of the formerly admitted attorney to provide the notice required by this subdivision shall continue for as long as the formerly admitted attorney is disbarred, suspended, administratively suspended or on inactive status; (4) Pa.R.D.E. 217 {e), which states that within ten days after the effective date of the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer to inactive status order, the formerly admitted attorney shall file with the Board a verified statement; (5) Pa.R.D.E. 217{j) (2), which states that the only law-related activities that ·may be conducted by a formerly admitted 14 attorney are the following: (i) legal work of a preparatory nature, such as legal research, assembly of data and other necessary information, and drafting of transactional documents, pleadings, briefs, and other similar documents; ( ii) direct communication with the client or third parties to the extent permitted by paragraph (3); and (iii) accompanying a member in good standing of the Bar of this Commonwealth to a deposition or other discovery matter or to a meeting regarding a matter that is not currently in litigation, for the limited purpose of providing clerical assistance to the member in good standing who appears as the representative of the client; (6) Pa.R.D.E. 217(j) (3), which states that a formerly admitted attorney may have direct communication with a client or third party regarding a matter being handled by the attorney, organization or firm for which the formerly admitted attorney works only if the communication is limited to ministerial matters such as scheduling, billing, updates, confirmation of receipt or sending of correspondence and messages. The formerly admitted attorney shall clearly indicate in any such communication that he or she is a legal assistant and identify the supervising attorney; (7) Pa.R.D.E. 217(j) (4) (v), which states that a formerly admitted attorney is specifically prohibited from . having any contact with clients either in person, by telephone, or in writing, except as provided in paragraph (3); (8) Pa.R-.D.E. 217 (j) (4) (vi), which states that a formerly admitted attorney is specifically prohibited from rendering 15 legal consultation client; or advice to a (9) Pa.R.D.E. 217(j) (4) (vii), which states that a formerly admitted attorney is specifically prohibited from appearing on behalf of a client in any hearing or proceeding or before any judicial officer, arbitrator, mediator, court, public agency, referee, magistrate, hearing officer or any other adjudicative person or body; and (10)Pa.R.D.E. 217(j) (4) (viii), which states that a formerly admitted attorney is specifically prohibited from appearing as a representative of the client at a deposition or other discovery matter. SPECIFIC JOINT RECOMMENDATION FOR DISCIPLINE 32. the Petitioner and Respondent jointly recommend that appropriate discipline for Respondent's admitted misconduct is· a suspension from the practice of law for a period of one year and one day. 33. being Respondent imposed Pennsylvania. executed upon consents Supreme this required she consents to by her Attached to Affidavit stating that hereby by to the the that Petition is Rule 215(d), discipline Court of Respondent's Pa.R.D.E., recommended discipline, including the mandatory acknowledgements contained in Rule 215(d) (1) through (4), Pa.R.D.E. 16 34. In support recommendation, of Petitioner and Respondent's joint it is respectfully submitted that there are several mitigating circumstances: a. Respondent has misconduct and violating Professional of engaging admitted the Conduct in charged Rules and Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement; b. Respondent as is has cooperated with Petitioner, evidenced by Respondent's herein and her consent admissions receiving to a suspension of one year and one day; c. Respondent has no record of discipline; and d. Respondent and is remorseful understands she for her misconduct should be disciplined, as is evidenced by her- consent to receiving a suspension of one year and one day. 35. bring to through Respondent, the attention of Disciplinary Board and the the her attorney, desires three-member panel Supreme Court of of to the Pennsylvania that if the within disciplinary matter had proceeded to a disciplinary hearing, she experienced Respondent would have testified that several significant collectively distracted Respondent and attending to, her CLE personal from being mindful requirements. 17 events Those that of, alleged events, which occurred from the middle of 2010 through all of 2011, are as follows: attorney and Respondent's household pregnant; experienced husband chores Respondent worked full time as an refused and other and Respondent severe to marital assist matters; stress; Respondent Respondent with became discovered that her husband was having an extramarital relationship in March 2012. Precedent suggests that Respondent's unauthorized 36. practice of law warrants a suspension of one year and one day. In Office of Disciplinary Counsel Forman, No. 70 DB 2001 (S.Ct. v. Steven Clark Order dated 1/31/03) (D.Bd. Rpt. dated 11/13/02), Respondent Forman claimed that he was unaware of his transfer to inactive status because he had not received notices inactive status. stating that he was transferred to Respondent Forman was suspended for one year and a day for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law for twelve years. The Disciplinary Board, citing another case, stated that "it is not unreasonable to expect an attorney to be continuously aware of the status of his privilege to practice law." D. Bd. the length Respondent of the Forman's: Rpt. suspension, lack admission to rule violations; 18 of the a 7. In determining Board considered disciplinary record; expressions of remorse; and strong character evidence. The Board also found that Id. Respondent Forman's "actions were not defiant." Id. at 8. supports Forman the conclusion that Respondent's unauthorized practice of law warrants a suspension of one year and one discipline, remorse, day even though she lacks a record of she has admitted her misconduct and expressed and she claims that several personal events diverted her attention from her deficient CLE requirements. 37. There are other disciplinary cases aside from Forman that support imposing on Respondent a suspension of one year and unauthorized one day practice Disciplinary Counsel 2006 Rpt. (D.Bd. Griffiths, who suspension of v. for of her law. Stephen 4/4/08) (S.Ct. was on having See, H. engaged e.g.' Griffiths, Order inactive one year and one day in the Office of No. 191 DB 8/29/08) (Respondent status, for received. a engaging in the unauthorized .practice of law in not less than 50 matters, which consisted of representing parties in civil actions in the Court of Common Pleas of performing other legal services; Philadelphia County .and Respondent Griffiths had no record of discipline, expressed remorse, and established Braun mitigation) ; Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Robert Mark Unterberger, No. 14 DB 2007 (D.Bd. Rpt. 2/21/08) (S ..Ct. Order 6/18/08) (Respondent Unterberger, 19 who was on inactive status, received a suspension of one year and one day ·for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law by entering his appearance in approximately 2 94 cases in the Court· of Common Pleas of Luzerne County, and representing himself to clients, judges, eligible to record attorneys and third parties practice of law; Respondent discipline, responsibility for his Unterberger cooperated actions, that he· was with and had no ODC, took established Braun mitigation) . 38. After examining precedent and giving consideration to Respondent's admissions and the mitigating circumstances, Petitioner and Respondent submit that a oneyear-and-one-day suspension is appropriate discipline ·for Respondent's misconduct. WHEREFORE, Petitioner and. Respondent respectfully request that: a. Pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 215(e) and 215(g), the three-member panel of the Disciplinary Board review and Support of approve the Discipline on Joint Petition Consent and in file its recommendation with the Supreme Court· of Pennsylvania recommending that the Supreme Court enter an Order that Respondent receive a one-year-and-one-day suspension; and 20 b. Pursuant to Pa.R.D.E. 215(i), the three- member panel of the Disciplinary Board enter an order for Respondent to pay the necessary expenses incurred in the investigation and prosecution of this matter as a condition to the grant expenses be imposition of the Petition, and paid by Respondent of discipline under that all before the Pa.R.D.E. 215 (g) . Respectfully and jointly submitted, OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL PAUL J. KILLION CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL By Richard Hernandez Disciplinary Counsel By Stretton, Esq. Counsel for Respondent Date By Esq. Date 21 BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner ODC File No. C1-12-59 v. Atty. Reg. No, 92637 JILL CAROL CASTELLINI, (Philadelphia) Respondent VERIFICATION The statements Petition In Pa.R.D.E. 215(d) knowledge, the Support contained Of in the Discipline On foregoing Joint Consent Under are true and correct to the best of our information and belief and are made subject to penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. §4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. Richard Hernandez Disciplinary Counsel Date Esq. .. BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner ODC File No. C1-12-59 v. Atty. Reg. No. 92637 JILL CAROL CASTELLINI, Respondent (Philadelphia) AFFIDAVIT UNDER RULE 21S(d), Pa.R.D.E. Respondent, Jill Carol Castellini, hereby states that she consents to the imposition of a suspension of one year and one day as jointly recommended by Petitioner, Office of Disciplinary Counsel, in Support of and Respondent in the Joint Petition Discipline on Consent and further states that: 1. Her consent is freely and voluntarily rendered; she is not being subjected to coercion or duress; she is fully aware of the implications of submitting the consent; and she has consulted with Samuel C. Stretton, Esquire,· in connection with the decision to consent to discipline; 2. She is aware that there is presently pending an investigation into allegations that she has been guilty of misconduct as set forth in the Joint Petition; 3. She acknowledges that the material forth in the Joint Petition are true; and facts set ' ' 4. She consents because she knows that if charges predicated upon the matters under investigation were filed, she could not successfully defend against them. Esquire Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of _J_l)-'-'j..v'------,-------' 2012. Notary Public IIINVA11.SNN3d ~0 IU1\13MNOWW00

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.