No. 1917, Disciplinary Docket No. 3

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner No. 1917 Disciplinary Docket No. 3 No. 59 DB 2012 v. Attorney Registration No. 88261 DAMON K. ROBERTS, Respondent (Philadelphia) ORDER PER CURIAM: AND NOW, this 281h day of March, 2013, upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Three-Member Panel of the Disciplinary Board dated January 25, 2013, 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 Damon K. Roberts is suspended on consent from the Bar of this Commonwealth for a period of thirty months and he shall comply with all the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E. It is further ORDERED that, at the conclusion of the suspension period, respondent shall pay the costs incurred by the Disciplinary Board in the investigation and prosecution of this matter. A True Copy Patricia Nicola As Of 3/28/L013 ~}&#.&.) Attest: ChiefCier Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ,.· BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL Petitioner v. No. 59 DB 2012 Attorney Registration No. 88261 DAMON K. ROBERTS 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 Charlotte S. Jefferies, Stephan K. Todd, and David E. Schwager, has reviewed the Joint Petition in Support of Discipline on Consent filed in the above-captioned matter on August 8, 2012. The Panel approves the Joint Petition consenting to a 30 month 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. ~~~/ Charlotte S. Jeffe eS:~nel Chair The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Date: 1/.zs/:Jor:J THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA B~FORE OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner No. 59 DB 2012 v. Atty. Reg. No. 88261 DAMON K. ROBERTS, Respondent (Philadelphia) JOINT PETITION IN SUPPORT OF DISCIPLINE ON CONSENT UNDER Pa.R.D.E. 215(d) Petitioner, Paul J. Killion, Office of Disciplinary Counsel Disciplinary Counsel, Roberts, Esquire, and Counsel for Respondent, Discipline Disciplinary by Chief Disciplinary Counsel, and Harriet R. Brumberg, of ("ODC"), on and by Respondent, Barbara S. Rosenberg, Damon K. Esquire, file this Joint Petition In Support Consent under Enforcement Pennsylvania ("Pa.R.D.E.") Rule 215 (d), of and respectfully represent that: I. 1. PA Petitioner, Judicial P.O. Box pursuant Center, 62485, to BACKGROUND whose principal office is located at Suite 2700, Harrisburg, Pa.R.D.E. 207, PA with 601 Commonwealth 17106-2485, the power is and Avenue, invested duty to investigate all matters involving alleged misconduct of an attorney admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to prosecute all disciplinary F11:.eE:-~ AUG 0 8 2012 omce of the secretary The Discipiinary Board of the Supri:>mG GGcWt et Peoosylvan~ brought in accordance with the various provisions of said Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement. 2. Respondent, Damon K. Roberts, was admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth on December 6, 2001. 3. Respondent maintained an office for of law at 1700 Reed Street, Philadelphia, PA 4. subject Pursuant to to Pa.R.D.E. 19146. 201 (a) (1), disciplinary the the practice Respondent jurisdiction of is the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. II. FACTUAL ADMISSIONS AND VIOLATIONS OF RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT 5. Respondent specifically admits to the truth of the factual allegations and conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 6 through 187, infra. CHARGE I: 6. THANIMAS A. SCOTT MATTER On February 3, 2009, First Trust Bank filed a complaint against Ms. Thanimas A. recover real $38,006.71 property Philadelphia, 00258, owed on Ms. located PA. February at First Term, Scott's 215 North Trust Bank v. 2009 (Court of (the bank) Scott seeking to mortgage Farson Scott et Common for her Street, a~., Pleas No. of Philadelphia County) . 7. On July 30, 2009: a. the bank filed a praecipe to enter a default 2 judgment against Ms. Scott and in favor of the bank; and b. in accordance with a court order dated June 11, 2009, Prothonotary the entered a judgment in favor of the bank. 8. On August 7, 2009: a. Respondent had a legal consultation with Ms. Scott negotiating regarding modification with the bank, loan a obtaining an order to stay a foreclosure, and preparing a foreclosure defense to the bank's default judgment against Ms. Scott; b. Ms. Scott paid Respondent a $150 consultation fee; c. Ms. Scott provided Respondent with documents relevant against the to her July default the bank's property, 30, including 2009 judgment pending praecipe that the a to bank action copy of enter had a filed against Ms. Scott; d. Respondent briefly documents, then told reviewed Ms. Ms. Scott Scott's his would review the matter and get started; 3 firm e. Respondent provided Ms. Scott with a written fee agreement setting forth the rate ·and basis of Respondent's fee; f. Ms. Scott signed the fee agreement and dated i t "8/7/09"; g. Ms. Scott agreed to pay Respondent a $5, 900 legal fee; and h. Ms. Scott agreed to pay Respondent an initial $1,500 deposit. 9. Respondent's written fee agreement with Ms. Scott provided that "upon signing the agreement, you become my client." 10. Respondent failed to: a. act with reasonable diligence and motion to open the bank's default file a judgment within ten days; and b. inform Ms. Scott that Respondent would not file a motion until Respondent received ·her $1,500 deposit. 11. Respondent Respondent within ten reopen the failed to inform Ms. filed a motion to reopen the days after judgment its if entry, then Respondent's meritorious defense. 4 Scott default the that judgment court answer if would stated a a. Respondent failed to explain a matter to the extent necessary to permit Ms. Scott to make an informed decision regarding Respondent's representation. 12. On September 4, 2009, Respondent met with Ms. Scott, during which time: a. Respondent received $1,500 from Ms. Scott in partial payment of Respondent's legal fee; b. Respondent informed Ms. Scott that it "could be too late" to open the default judgment; c. Ms. Scott Respondent deadline her expressed failed to file to anger inform a her motion to that of the open the default judgment; and d. Respondent agreed to file a motion to open the default judgment. 13. On September Petition to Open 2 4, 2009, Judgment Pursuant Respondent to filed Pa.R.C.P. a 237.3 (Petition to Open); Respondent alleged in: a. paragraph 16, brought that the default to Respondent's judgment ·was attention on September 4, 2009; i. Respondent's misleading 5 pleading in that was on August false 7, and 20-09, Respondent Scott received documents informing default judgment from Ms. that a entered on Respondent had been July 30, 2009. b. paragraph 17, that on September 14, 2009, Ms. Scott did not have the necessary $54 for filing fees and the Petition was denied for lack of payment; i. Respondent's misleading 2009, in that Respondent Ms.· Scott, 2009, was pleading on false and 4, September received $1,500 from and prior to September 24, Respondent never requested the filing fee from Ms. Scott. 14. On October 15, 2009, the bank filed an answer in opposition to the Petition to Open. 15. Idee Fox By Order dated granted Respondent twenty December Respondent's days to 8, 2009, Petition file an to Answer the Honorable Open to and the gave bank's complaint. a. On December 28, 2009, Respondent filed an Answer. 16. On April 14, 2010, the bank filed a Summary Judgment, which Respondent received. 6 Motion for a. Respondent failed to inform Ms. Scott of his receipt of the Bank's motion. b. Respondent diligence failed and to file act a with timely reasonable answer to the motion by May 14, 2010. 17. Respondent failed to act with reasonable diligence in requesting a loan modification package for Ms. Scott. 18. On April 19, 2010, Respondent received modification package from the bank; on April 20, a loan 2010, Ms. Scott completed the loan modification paperwork and gave it to Respondent. a. Respondent diligence failed and to timely act with submit the reasonable completed loan modification package to the bank. 19. granting On the May 24, bank's 2010, the motion Court for assessing damages of $38,006.71, entered summary an judgment Order and plus interest to the date of the Sheriff Sale, and foreclosure costs. a. 20. Law in Respondent received the Court's Order. On June 2, 2010, Respondent filed a Memorandum of Opposition (Memorandum of Law) ; Law, to Motion for Summary Judgment on page one of in the Memorandum of Respondent alleged that he had "been distracted by· an 7 unexpected family emergency and allowed the response date [for the Motion for Summary Judgment] to slip past." a. In the event that mental Respondent's condition physical materially impaired Respondent's ability to represent Ms. Respondent failed to or withdraw Scott, from the representation. 21. not Respondent failed to inform Ms. Scott that he had filed Judgment, a timely answer to the Motion the Court had granted the motion, for Summary and her house was scheduled for a sheriff sale. 22. On June 16, 2010: a. the bank filed a praecipe to enter judgment in its favor; b. judgment was entered against Ms. Scott; c. the bank filed a writ of execution; and d. a writ of execution was entered against Ms. Scott's property. 23. As a result of Respondent's failure to act with reasonable diligence, on July 23, 2010, Ms. Scott filed a bankruptcy petition to save her home. 24. reasonable expenses, As a result of Respondent's failure to act with diligence, Ms. Scott including interest, incurred penalties, 8 additional foreclosure fees, and bankruptcy costs. 25. June 8, On July 12, 2010, Ms. Scott, who had a copy of a 2010 invoice from Respondent, requested an accounting of Respondent's legal fee. a. Respondent failed to provide the requested accounting. 26. On July 12 and 27, 2010, Ms. Scott requested a copy of her file. a, Respondent failed to provide Ms. Scott with a copy of her file. 27. 26 By his conduct as alleged in paragraphs 6 through above, Respondent violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: a. RPC 1.3, which states that a lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; b. RPC 1. 4 (a) (3), shall keep which the states client that a reasonably lawyer informed about the status of the matter; c. RPC 1.4(b), which states that a lawyer shall explain a necessary informed matter to to permit decisions representation; 9 the the extent reasonably client regarding to make the d. RPC 1.16(a)(2), which states that except as stated in paragraph (c), a lawyer shall not represent a client or, where representation has withdraw commenced, shall representation of physical impairs or the a client if from the condition mental lawyer's ability the lawyer's materially to represent the client; e. 1.16(d), RPC which states termination of representation, steps take the to such as giving a lawyer shall extent practicable to protect a upon that reasonably client's interests, reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, which any surrendering papers and property to the client is advance payment entitled of fee and or refunding expense has not been earned or incurred. that The lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to the extent permitted by other law; f. RPC 3.3(a)(l), which states that a lawyer shall not knowingly make a false statement· of material fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or 10 law previously made to the tribunal states that by the lawyer; g. RPC 8.4(c), which professional engage in misconduct conduct for involving is lawyer a it to dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and h. RPC 8.4(d), professional states which misconduct that for is lawyer a it to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. CHARGE II: 28. On December UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW 6, 2001, Respondent was admitted to practice law in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 29. complete Pa.R.C.L.E. 105(a) (3) requires annually hours continuing 12 of each attorney legal to education during the attorney's compliance period. 30. which Respondent assignment was assigned required that to Compliance Respondent Group complete 3, his annual CLE by December 31 of each year. 31. For the year 2009, Respondent failed to complete his 12 hours of continuing legal education by December 31, 2009. a. On February 19, 2010 and May Respondent received written notice 11 26, 2010, from the CLE Board of his failure to timely complete his annual CLE requirement. 32. By Order dated July 27, 2010, the Supreme Court administratively suspended Respondent from the practice of law effective August 26, 2010. 33. Suzanne By E. certified Price, letter dated July Attorney Registrar, 27, to 2010, from Respondent, Ms. Price: a. informed Respondent that she had received a certified copy of the 27, 2010 Order Supreme Court's providing that July Respondent will be Administratively Suspended effective August 26, 2010; explained b. that administratively Respondent if suspended, Respondent is will be required to comply with Pa.R.D.E. 217 and D.Bd. Rules §§91.91-91.99; and c. enclosed a copy of the Supreme Court's July 27, 2010 Order. 34. Respondent is the managing attorney in the law practice of Damon K. Roberts and Associates. 35. office Damon for the Philadelphia, PA K. Roberts practice and of law 19103-6306. 12 Associates at 1613 maintained Spruce an Street, 36. to Ms. Price sent her July 27, 2010 certified letter the attorney registration address Respondent had reported on Respondent's 2010-2011 PA Attorney's Annual Fee form, dated May Philadelphia, PA 37. On 23, 2010: Spruce 1613 Street, 19103. or after August 26, 2010, Respondent maintained an office for the practice of law at 1600 Market Street, 25th Floor, Philadelphia, PA a. Respondent failed 19103. to advise the Attorney Registrar of his change of attorney address. 38. Upon suspension, registered being Respondent or certified transferred failed mail, to to administrative promptly return receipt notify, by requested, all: a. clients being represented in pending matters of Respondent's suspension transfer and to administrative Respondent's consequent inability to act as an attorney; b. clients involved in pending or administrative proceedings, and the attorney for such matter, each adverse Respondent's suspension party in transfer and consequent as an attorney; and 13 to of administrative inability to act c. other persons any time with whom Respondent to have expect may at professional contacts under circumstances where there is a reasonable probability that they may infer that Respondent continued to be an attorney in good standing. 39. States Respondent was admitted to practice in the United District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 40. Upon being placed on administrative suspension for failing to complete Respondent's CLE, Respondent failed to promptly notify the Clerk of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, as required by Local Rule of Civil Procedure 8 3. 6, Rule I IA of the United States District Court of Pennsylvania. 41. During the time administratively suspended, notice to persons time expect other to have that Respondent with Respondent failed whom Respondent professional was to provide may at contacts any under circumstances where there was a reasonable probability that they might infer that Respondent attorney in good standing. 14 continued to be an 42. From Respondent August engaged 26, in 2010, the to September practice of 13, law, 2010, in that Respondent: a, performed law-related activities from an office that was not staffed by a supervising attorney on a full time basis; b. performed clients, activities law-related for including some whom Respondent had previously represented; c. represented himself as a lawyer able to person, by practice law in Pennsylvania; d. had contacts with clients in telephone, and in writing; e. participated in the management of legal actions; f. participated in the management of Respondent's law firm; g. provided legal advice; h. rendered services requiring the use of legal skills or knowledge; and i. 43. 2010, handled client funds. From at least August 26, 2010 to September 13, Respondent maintained an office for the practice of 15 law at 1600 Market Street, Floor, 25th Philadelphia, PA 19103. 44. Counsel On (CDC) September 7, 2010, Office of Disciplinary hand-delivered a letter to Respondent; CDC's letter: a. advised Respondent suspended that attorney is an administratively not permitted to: maintain a law office or law practice; have any client matters contact while except under the supervising attorney who for ministerial supervision has registered such with the Disciplinary Board; on behalf of proceeding or arbitrator, referee, a client before mediator, magistrate, any in any a as or appear hearing judicial court, of or officer, public agency, hearing officer or any other adjudicative person or body; b. stated that ODC had reason to believe that Respondent was continuing to maintain a law office, have client contact, and practice law; c. instructed Respondent to immediately cease and desist from the foregoing activities and comply with Rule 217; 16 d. explained that ODC consider will Respondent's refusal to cease and desist and failure to comply with Rule 217 in any future recommendation for discipline; and e. enclosed a copy of Enforcement Rules 217 and 219. 45. Respondent failed to immediately cease and desist from the foregoing activities and comply with the mandates of Rule 217. 46. fifteen suspended By letter dated September 9, 2010, which date was days from after the Respondent practice of was law, administratively Respondent wrote to each of his clients: a. thanking each client for being a client of Damon K. Roberts and Associates; b. advising each office's move client "over of the Respondent's summer to 1600 Market Street"; c. stating that however, with stating the midst of the move, we did not update our new address the Board "[i]n Continuing and missed that I 17 Legal their would be Education July 27th (CLE) notice administratively suspended unless caught I with up my CLE Credits"; d. claiming that "the received August on notice" and 29 has Respondent since been affect our taldng CLE classes to catch up; e. stating that ability "this to will handle not your case once reinstated"; f. professing to be "proud" to have caught up with Respondent's CLE credits "this week"; g. representing that Respondent "plan [ s] to be reinstated this week"; h. explaining that the client could obtain new counsel because of Respondent's conduct; and i. adding that the client could contact Respondent if he or she had any questions. 4 7. letter The to contents of Respondent's clients Respondent's September 2010 incomplete were 9, and misleading in that: a. Respondent failed to expressly state that he had been placed on administrative suspension; b. Respondent clients failed that by 18 to expressly Supreme Court inform Order his dated July 26, 2010, Respondent effective was August prohibited 26, from 2010, handling their cases until his reinstatement; c. Respondent that wrongly suggested to his clients Respondent would be reinstated ~this week"; and d. Respondent involved seek failed to advise in pending matters legal advice all that elsewhere clients they must or obtain substitute counsel. 48. To the extent Respondent may have notified his clients of his administrative suspension, Respondent failed to keep and maintain records of the various steps he took to comply with Pa.R.D.E. 217. 4 9. his The September material legal 9, stationery 2010 letter misrepresentation on to which his of Respondent clients fact wrote contained and law Respondent's services in that the letterhead stated: a about ~Damon K. Roberts & Associate, Real Estate/Land Use Attorneys." 50. On September 13, 2010, Respondent filed a Statement of Compliance and was reinstated to the practice of law in Pennsylvania. 19 51. By his through 50 above, of Professional conduct as alleged in paragraphs 28 Respondent violated the following Rules Conduct and Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement: a. RPC 5.5(a), which states that a lawyer shall not practice violation law of profession the in in a jurisdiction regulation that of jurisdiction, in the legal or assist another in doing so; b. RPC 7 .1, which states that a lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services. A communication is false or misleading if it contains fact or a material law, misrepresentation or omits a fact of necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading; c. RPC 7.5(a), which states that a lawyer shall not use a firm name, letterhead professional designation that 7. 1. or violates other Rule A trade name may be used by a lawyer in private practice if it does not imply a connection with a government, government agency or with a public or charitable legal 20 services in organization violation lawful a of firm and Rule may not otherwise If otherwise 7.1. use include in, its name, is as, or continue to the name or names of one of more deceased or retired members of the firm or of a predecessor firm in a continuing line of succession; d. Pa.R.D.E. wilful 203 (b) (3) which 1 that states violation of any other provision of the Enforcement Rules, discipline, charged the via in shall be grounds for Enforcement subsections Rules through (e) ( 1) 1 infra: e. Pa.R.D.E. 217(a), formerly admitted notify, or which states attorney cause to shall be pending by return receipt all clients being represented in matters, administrative disbarment, suspension a promptly notified, registered or certified mail, requested, that other than or of the proceedings, suspension, or litigation transfer to administrative inactive status and the consequent inability of the formerly admitted attorney 21 to act as an attorney after the effective date of the disbarme.nt, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer to inactive status and shall advise said clients to seek legal advice elsewhere; f. Pa.R.D.E. which 217(b), formerly admitted notify, or states attorney cause to shall be all pending litigation proceedings, for each the adverse proceeding, of the administrative or in involved in administrative attorney party or attorneys such disbarment, suspension by return receipt clients who are and a promptly notified, registered or certified mail, requested, that or matter or suspension, transfer to inactive status and consequent inability of the formerly admitted attorney to act as an attorney after disbarment, suspension the effective suspension, or transfer date of the administrative to inactive status. The notice to be given to the client shall advise the attorney formerly the or prompt attorneys admitted client substitution does 22 in attorney. not of place In obtain another of the the event substitute counsel before disbarment, the effective be the admitted agency for attorney in which leave given to responsibility to to to withdraw. attorney party shall residence of of the in The or it the the court is notice client the of to be for an place the or pending attorneys state shall formerly the proceeding the adverse status, move the of administrative suspension, suspension or transfer date of formerly admitted attorney; g. Pa.R.D.E. formerly notify, admitted or cause disbarment, suspension by which 217(c), states attorney to be shall transfer registered or receipt requested: to a promptly notified, suspension, or that of the administrative inactive certified mail, status, return (1) all persons or their agents or guardians to whom a fiduciary duty is or may be disbarment, suspension and (2) formerly owed at any suspension, or all transfer other to persons time the administrative inactive with admitted attorney may at 23 after status, whom the any time expect to have circumstances professional where there contacts is a reasonable probability that they may infer that she continues standing. an admitted required continue for admitted attorney attorney by this attorney administratively is good of the provide subdivision long as to he or in responsibility The formerly notice as under as the disbarred, suspended or the shall formerly suspended, on inactive status; h. 217(i), Pa.R.D.E. formerly admitted which states attorney shall that keep a and maintain records of the various steps taken by such person under these rules so that, upon any subsequent proceeding instituted by or against such person, with these rules and proof of compliance with the disbarment, suspension, administrative suspension or transfer inactive order be available. to Proof of status compliance will with these rules shall be a condition precedent to any petition for reinstatement; 24 i. Pa.R.D.E. 217(j) (1), law-related which activities admitted attorney states of shall the be that all formerly conducted under the supervision of a member in good standing of the Bar of this Commonwealth who shall be responsible admitted for ensuring of the complies attorney requirements that this formerly with subdivision the (j). If the formerly admitted attorney is engaged by a law firm or other organization providing legal services, whether other relationship, or organization firm or by employment or an attorney of the firm shall be designated by the organization as the supervising attorney for purposes of this subdivision; j. Pa.R.D.E. formerly 217(j) (3), admitted which states attorney may communication with a client or regarding being attorney, a matter that have a direct third party handled by the organization or firm for which the formerly admitted attorney works only if the communication matters updates, is such limited as to ministerial scheduling, . billing, confirmation of receipt or sending 25 of correspondence formerly admitted indicate in any and messages. attorney The shall clearly such communication that he or she is a legal assistant and identify the supervising attorney; k. Pa.R.D.E. (ix), 217(j)(4)(ii), and (x), (iii), (iv), which state that a (vi), formerly admitted attorney may not engage in any form law-related of Commonwealth activities except in in accordance following requirements: Without the other restrictions (j ) , a formerly in this admitted this with the limiting subdivision attorney is specifically prohibited from engaging in any of the following (ii) activities: performing any law-related services from an office that is not staffed by a supervising attorney on a full time basis; performing any law-related services client the who in the formerly past was admitted (iii) for any represented by attorney; ( iv) representing himself or herself as a lawyer or person of similar status; (v) having any contact in person, with clients 26 either by telephone, or in writing, except as provided in paragraph ( 3) ; (vi) rendering legal consultation or advice to a client; (ix) negotiating or transacting any matter for or on behalf of a client with third parties or having any contact third with parties regarding such a negotiation or transaction; receiving, (X) disbursing or otherwise handling client funds; and 1. Pa.R.D.E. 219(d) (3), which states that on or before July 1 of each year all persons required by this rule to pay an annual fee shall file with Office a signed Attorney with the form Registration the following person who notify the Attorney writing Attorney of previ~usly has any prescribed Office in procedures: filed such a Registration chance submitted Registration in within the 30 by the accordance (3) Every form shall Office in information days after such change. CHARGE III: VERNA LOWE AND SYLVIA JORDON MATTER 52. On July 23, 2007, Ms. Virmie Morgan died testate. 53. Ms. Morgan's Last Will and Testament: 27 a. appointed her daughter, Verna Lowe, to be the executrix of her estate; and b. devised West to her real property, Erie Avenue, three of located at 1904 Philadelphia, PA 19140, daughters, Verna Lowe, her Sylvia Jordon, and Tina Coleman. 54. On February 1, 2010, Respondent met with Ms. Lowe and Ms. Jordon, during which time Respondent: a. had a legal consul tat ion with Ms. Lowe and Ms. Jordon. 1. Respondent received a $75 consultation fee. Respondent and invoice 2. Ms. documenting signed Lowe an Respondent's receipt of the $75 consultation fee. b. gave Ms. Lowe and Ms. Jordon a written fee agreement that set forth the basis and rate of Respondent's fee. 1. The fee agreement provided that "the fee for deed transfer is $590 and $2500 'for will probate." 2. Respondent and fee agreement. 28 Ms. Jordon signed the c. was retained to: 1. probate the Will of Virmie Morgan; and 2. prepare and file a deed transferring to Ms. Jordon the deceased's real property located 1904 at Philadelphia, PA d. West Erie Avenue, 19140. was requested by Ms. Lowe and Ms. Jordon to act expeditiously to probate their mother's will and have her real property transferred to Ms. would Jordon because the Water Department not turn on the water unless Ms. Jordon established that she was the owner of 1904 West Erie Avenue, Philadelphia, PA 19140. Respondent received $2, 500 from Ms. Lowe and Ms. a. 55. the Jordon. Respondent failed to deposit fee Respondent received from Ms. Ms. Lowe withdraw into the fee an as IOLTA Jordon and account earned or retainer and to expenses as incurred. 56. Respondent failed to act with reasonable diligence and have the deed transferred from the estate to Ms. Jordon. 29 57. During a staff meeting in early June 2010: a. Respondent's then law associate, Hathaway, Esquire, Jessica M. reminded Respondent that the deed had not yet been prepared; b. Respondent sisters informed did not Ms. wish Hathaway to have that the the estate probated at this time due to lack of funds; c. Respondent instructed Ms. Hathaway to prepare the deed for recording; d. Ms. Hathaway explained that be not recorded the deed could without Letters Testamentary; and e. Respondent instructed Ms. Hathaway prepare the deed and take it for to recording without Letters Testamentary. provide competent representation when Respondent instructed Ms. Hathaway to prepare the 58. Respondent the deed failed and to record deed without Letters Testamentary. 59. capacity On as individually, Indenture June 8, 2010, Executor Ms. Ms. of Jordon, transferring Ms. Lowe, Ms. and Morgan's Ms. Morgan's Jordon for consideration of $1. 30 acting both Coleman, real in her Estate signed and an property to Ms. 60. Per Respondent's instructions, Ms. Hathaway prepared the deed and related paperwork and took it to the Recorder of Deeds for recording. 61. On June 15, 2010, the Recorder of Deeds rejected the transfer of the deed because the Real Estate Transfer Tax Certification did not include decedent's name and estate number. 62. Ms. Hathaway advised Ms. Lowe that the deed could not be recorded without an Estate File Number and Letters Testamentary; Ms. Lowe informed Ms. Hathaway that she believed that she had submitted the Will for probate and obtained the necessary Estate File Number 2010, Ms. and Letters Testamentary. 63. On or before June 28, Hathaway called the Register of Wills and learned that Ms. Morgan's Will had been probated and Letters Testamentary had been issued to Ms. Lowe on March 28, 2008. 64. On June 30, 2010, Ms. Hathaway paid $200 to the Recorder of Deeds to record the transfer of Ms. Morgan's real property to Ms. Jordon. 65. Ms. Hathaway informed successfully recorded the deed, advised Ms. Hathaway that: 31 Ms. Lowe that she after which time Ms. had Lowe a. Ms. Lowe would handle any estate taxes with her accountant; and b. Ms. Lowe had only hired Respondent for the deed transfer. 66. On or after June 30, 2010, Ms. Hathaway informed Respondent that: a. Ms. Morgan's Will had been probated in March 2008; b. she had recorded the deed; c. Ms. Lowe would handle any estate taxes with her accountant; d. Ms. Lowe had only hired Respondent deed transfer, for for which Respondent the charged $590; and e. Ms. Lowe wanted a refund of Respondent's unearned fee. 67. Respondent failed to refund his unearned fee upon the completion and termination of the representation. 68. From time to time, Ms. Lowe would call Respondent's office requesting to speak with Respondent and requesting a refund of Respondent's unearned fee. a. Respondent failed to speak to promptly refund his unearned fee. 32 Ms. Lowe or 69. From Respondent time to time, Ms. Hathaway of his duty to refund his would unearned remind fee to Ms. Lowe. a. Respondent failed to promptly refund his unearned fee to Ms. Lowe. 70. On or before September 3, 2010, Respondent agreed to refund $1,200 of his unearned fee to Ms. Lowe. After September 3, a. 2010, Respondent issued a partial refund check to Ms. Lowe. 1. Respondent's from the first bank after funds, check due was to which returned insufficient Respondent time issued a replacement check. 71. By letter Respondent to Ms. Lowe, verbal agreement September 15, 9, 2010, from Respondent confirmed that he had a with before September dated Ms. Lowe 2010, to refund enclosed a $1,200 second on check or for $600, and stated that his refund was now paid in full. 72. By through 71 his above, conduct as Respondent alleged in violated the paragraphs 52 following Rules a shall of Professional Conduct: a. RPC 1.1, which states that lawyer provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation 33 requires the legal knowledge, skill, preparation thoroughness necessary reasonably and the for representation; b. RPC 1.3, which states that a lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; c. RPC 1.4 (a) (4), shall which promptly states comply that with a lawyer reasonable requests for information; d. RPC 1.15(i), shall fees which deposit and states into expenses a that Trust that a lawyer Account have been legal paid in advance, to be withdrawn by the lawyer only as are fees unless the confirmed earned client in or expenses gives writing, incurred, informed to the consent, handling of fees and expenses in a different manner; and e. RPC which 1.16(d), states that upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and property to 34 which any the client is advance payment entitled of fee and or expense has not been earned or incurred. may retain papers refunding that The lawyer relating to the client to the extent permitted by other law. CHARGE IV: 7 3. Ms. (the Murrays) Avenue, SHEILA MURRAY AND LAWRENCE MURRAY MATTER Sheila Murray and her son, Lawrence Murray, owned real property located at 5636 Hadfield Philadelphia, PA 19143, upon which HSBC Bank, USA, NA (HSBC) had foreclosed for nonpayment of a mortgage. 74. On March 2, 2010, Respondent met with the Murrays, during which time Respondent: a. had a legal consultation with the Murrays. 1. received $150 in cash from the Murrays for the legal consultation. gave b. the Murrays a written fee agreement that stated: 1. Respondent's law firm was retained "assist with negotiating with to opposing counsel and to negotiate to attempt to stop sheriff's sale." 75. While Respondent, the Carrie Murrays Johnson, contacted the Sheriff's Office. 35 were consulting Respondent's with paralegal, a. The Sheriff's Office informed that 5636 Hadfield Street, had been sold at a Ms. Johnson Philadelphia, Sheriff sale PA, that very morning. 76. Ms. Johnson promptly informed Respondent what she had learned. 77. Respondent instructed Ms. Johnson, "Don't tell her [Ms. Murray], wait until after she pays us." 78. conduct Respondent instructed involving fraud, Ms. engage in and misrepresentation deceit, Johnson to in violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct. 7 9. After Respondent 5636 Hadfield Street, the Sheriff's learned from Philadelphia, Office, Respondent PA, Ms. Johnson that had been sold by failed to inform the Murrays of the material change in the status of their legal matter. 80. After Respondent learned from 5636 Hadfield Street, Philadelphia, the Sheriff's Respondent that stated Office, Respondent's law PA, signed firm was Ms. Johnson that had been sold by a fee agreement retained to "to negotiate to attempt to stop sheriff's Sale." 81. Respondent engaged in deceit, and misrepresentation. 36 conduct involving fraud, 82. During the March 2, 2010 meeting with the Murrays, Respondent had the Murrays sign a written retainer agreement for Respondent's legal services. 83. Respondent's pertinent part, that retainer agreement Respondent's payment provided, in schedule was as follows: 1. 2. On $295 due on March 18, 2010; and 3. 84. $295 due on March 4, 2010; $295 due on April 4, 2010. March 2, 2010, Ms. Murray also signed an agreement entitled "Credit Card Authorization for Casework to Damon K. Roberts & Associates"; the agreement authorized Respondent's law firm to: a. charge $150 to Ms. Murray's credit/debit card on March 4, 2010; and b. charge payment Ms. of Murray's the credit/debit contingency fee card for upon the completion of services. 85. On March 4, 2010, Ms. Murray received written Notice to Occupants that the mortgage holder had acquired ownership of her property at a Sheriff Sale. 86. On March 5, 2010, Ms. Murray faxed a copy of the Notice to Occupants to Respondent. 37 87. Respondent did not take any action to set aside the Sheriff's Sale of the Murrays' property. 88. From March 5, 2010 to May 29, 2010, Respondent failed to take any action on the Murray matter. Respondent 89. Murray options any to promptly might have failed that discuss been with Ms. available to accomplish her objectives to stay in her house. on May 90. Notice to informing 30, Vacate the purchased by 2010, the Property that Murrays that Fannie Mae Murrays the sent Murrays their Respondent had property and they were a received had required to been vacate the property. 91. By facsimile letter dated June 9, Johnson to Ms. Ms. rent Barbara Roach, from Ms. an agent for the purchaser, Johnson asked whether the to 2010, purchaser would consider a own agreement whereby the Murrays would pay $550 monthly to remain in the property. 92. On June 14, 2010, Ms. Johnson was informed that the purchaser had denied the Murr&ys' rent to own request. 93. call From time Respondent's to time office thereafter, requesting status of her legal matter. 38 Ms. Murray would information about the a. Respondent telephone failed calls to and return Ms. promptly Murray's provide her with the requested information. 94. to Ms. In or around June 24, 2010, Ms. Johnson explained Murray that Respondent could not assist her with regaining her real property. 95. Ms. By letter dated July 9, Murray, Respondent 2010, advised from Respondent to Ms. Murray that his representation had ended and her file was closed. 96. By his through 95 above, conduct as alleged in Respondent violated the paragraphs 73 following Rules of Professional Conduct: a. RPC 1.4(a)(2), which shall reasonably about the states consult means by that with which a lawyer the client the client's objectives are to be accomplished; b. RPC 1.4(a) (3), shall keep which the states client that a reasonably lawyer informed about the status of the matter; c. RPC 1. 4 (a) ( 4), shall which promptly states comply that with a lawyer reasonable requests for information; d. RPC 1.4(b), which states that a lawyer shall explain a matter 39 to the extent reasonably necessary to informed permit the client to make regarding decisions the representation; e. RPC 5.3(c)(l), which states that with respect to a non-lawyer employed or retained by or associated shall be person with responsible that would a for be a lawyer, a lawyer conduct of such a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct if engaged in by a the lawyer if the or, of knowledge lawyer orders the conduct, specific with ratifies the conduct involved; f. RPC 8.4(a), professional which misconduct violate or attempt Professional states to violate Conduct, induce another to for do that a is lawyer to the Rules of knowingly so, it or do assist or so through the acts of another; and g. RPC 8.4(c), professional engage in which states misconduct conduct for that a involving fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. 40 it is lawyer to dishonesty, CHARGE V: 97. firm On August 23, of Larry Pitt LARRY PITT MATTER 2010, Keith Jones retained the law Associates & to represent him in his August 17, 2010 personal injury matter. The law firm of Larry Pitt & Associates performed 98. legal services on behalf of Mr. Jones. 99. Pitt On that September he was 28, 2010, discharging Mr. Jones Mr. Pitt informed and Mr. retaining Respondent. 100. On contingent September fee represent him 29, agreement in his 2010, with August Mr. Jones Respondent's 17, 2010 signed a firm to law personal injury matter. 101. On or before November Insurance Company of America settlement "Damon K. check in Mr. 17, 2010, (Nationwide) Jones' matter, Nationwide issued a $25,000 made payable to Roberts and Associates and Larry Pitt & Assoc PC and Keith Jones." 102. On the $25,000 or after November 17, Nationwide settlement check to Respondent at Street, 25th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 103. 2010, Respondent received Nationwide. 41 the sent 1600 Market 19103. $25,000 check from 104. Respondent failed to promptly that Respondent had received the Mr. Pitt in which Mr. funds notify Pitt had an ownership interest. 105. Respondent Nationwide payable did not return and advise Nationwide to Respondent and the to Mr. $2 5, 000 reissue Jones a for check to check made Respondent's portion of the settlement. 106. Respondent signed his own name to the back of the $25,000 settlement check. 107. Larry Pitt's name was also signed to the back of the settlement check. 108. had Mr. Neither Respondent nor any agent Pitt's permission to sign Mr. of Respondent Pitt's name to the back of the $25,000 settlement check. 109. Respondent or his agent forged Pitt's Mr. signature on the back of the $25,000 settlement check. 110. On deposited the or about $25,000 November 29, check settlement 2010, into Respondent Respondent's escrow account at TD Banknorth, account number 424-1330226. 111. On $14,722.35 November from 30, 2010, Respondent's IOLTA Respondent account to withdrew pay Keith Jones his portion of the settlement. 112. $6,700 On from November 30, Respondent's 2010, IOLTA 42 Respondent account to transferred Respondent's operating account 1330218, for at TD Bank Respondent's North, portion account of the number Keith 424Jones settlement. 113. -Respondent failed to pay Mr. Pitt any portion of the settlement funds. 114. By his conduct through 113 above, as alleged in paragraphs 97 Respondent violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: a. RPC 1.15(d), which states that upon receiving Rule 1. 15 Funds or property which are not Fiduciary Funds or property, lawyer shall promptly notify the third person, consistent a client or with requirements of applicable Notification of receipt of the law. Fiduciary Funds or property to clients or other persons with a beneficial Funds or governed interest property by governing the in shall law, the such Fiduciary continue procedure and to be rules requirements of confidentiality and notice applicable to the Fiduciary entrustment; b. RPC 1.15(e), which stated in this Rule 43 states that except as or otherwise permit.ted by law or by agreement third person, deliver to property, a the with the lawyer client shall or third person any that the client or third person is entitled to receive and, upon request by client or third person, render a full shall Provided, however, delivery, accounting and Fiduciary be or property governed by the Fiduciary notice accounting the the of continue procedure requirements administration, and shall law, the governing that disclosure Funds rules promptly regarding accounting property; to promptly including but not limited to Rule 1.15 Funds, the client or and of confidentiality, applicable to the Fiduciary entrustment; c. RPC 1.15(f), which states that when in possession of funds or property in which two or more lawyer, property persons, claim one an shall be of whom may interest, kept separate lawyer until the dispute is lawyer shall promptly the be the funds or by the resolved. The distribute all portions of the funds or property, including 44 Rule 1.15 Funds, as to which the interests are not in dispute; and d. RPC which 8. 4 (c), professional engage misconduct conduct in that states for involving is lawyer a it to dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. CHARGE VI: 115. Respondent COMMINGLING FUNDS maintained an IOLTA account at TO Banknorth, account number 424-1330226 ("IOLTA account"). 116. Respondent maintained an operating account at TO account Banknorth, number 424-1330218 ("operating account") . A. ESCROW ACCOUNT 117. On March 2, 2011, Respondent had $64.64 in his 2011, Respondent transferred $2,.500 IOLTA account. 118. On March 9, from his operating account into his IOLTA account. 119. Respondent commingled his personal funds with 1. 15 funds fiduciary funds. 120. Respondent did not hold all Rule separate from his own property. 121. On April 29, 2011, remaining in his escrow account. 45 Respondent had $450.15 B. OPERATING ACCOUNT 122. From March repeatedly deposited 2009 through clients' March retainer 2011, fees Respondent into his law firm's operating account upon his receipt of the fees from his clients. 123. consent, Respondent failed to obtain his clients' confirmed in writing, informed to not deposit the retainer fees into his trust account to be withdrawn by Respondent only as his fees were earned or expenses were incurred. 124. By his through 123 above, conduct as alleged in paragraphs 115 Respondent violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: a. RPC 1.15(b) (two counts), which states that a lawyer shall hold property property. all separate Rule from the 1.15 Funds lawyer's and own Such property shall be identified and appropriately safeguarded; b. RPC 1.15(h), which states that a lawyer shall not deposit the lawyer's own funds in a Trust Account except for the sole purpose of paying service charges and only in an purpose; and 46 amount on that necessary account, for that c. RPC 1.15(i), shall fees which deposit and states into expenses a that Trust that a lawyer Account have been legal paid in advance, to be withdrawn by the lawyer only as are fees unless the confirmed earned client in or expenses gives writing, informed to the incurred, consent, handling of fees and expenses in a different manner. CHARGE VII: 125. (Saxon) Hobbs with GAIL E. COLON-HOBBS AND GEORGE HOBBS MATTER On March 12, informed Mrs. (the Hobbses) a modification 2010, Saxon Mortgage Services, Gail E. Colon-Hobbs and Mr. of a mortgage On or about March 18, on 2010, Respondent's loan modification agent, inquire about negotiating a retaining loan George that Saxon was unable to assist them the Hobbses' located at 1456 South Hurffville Road, Deptford, NJ 126. Inc. an attorney to modification of 08096. the Hobbses Mr. home called Steven Nahas, represent their to them in mortgage with Saxon. 127. Mr. Nahas went to the Hobbses' Respondent's mortgage modification services. 47 home to discuss 128. During the meeting at the Hobbses' home: a. Mr. Nahas agreement gave the Hobbses from Respondent's a written law firm, fee Damon K. Roberts & Associates; b. the Hobbses Certification a signed and Borrower's Authorization authorizing Respondent to apply and negotiate for a loan modification on their behalf; c. the Hobbses signed an Authorization to Release Information to enable Respondent to obtain documents necessary for the Debit/Credit Card representation; and d. Mrs. Hobbs signed a Authorization for Respondent's legal fee. 129. Respondent's fee agreement provided: a. that to the Hobbses assist them were in retaining attempting Respondent to obtain a loan modification of their property; b. Respondent's paid in fee $2,100 lump one was sum and or could in be three installments of $700; and c. upon signing the agreement, become Respondent's client. 48 the Hobbses 130. The Hobbses signed Respondent's fee agreement on March 18, 2010. 131. On March Colon-Hobbs paid 18, April 18, Respondent and May $700 for the 18, Hobbses, 2010, Respondent's Mrs. legal fee. 132. Mr. Nahas advised who were not behind on their mortgage when they signed Respondent's fee agreement, to allow their mortgage to become delinquent for at least two months in order for Mr. Nahas to be able to show "needu for the Hobbses' loan modification a. The Hobbses followed Respondent's agent's advice and allowed their mortgage to become severely delinquent. 133. Respondent's agent instructed the Hobbses to engage in fraudulent and deceitful conduct. 134. As mortgage to unnecessary a result become late of the Hobbses' delinquent, fees and the allowing Hobbses penalties and their incurred had great difficulty in subsequently bringing their mortgage current. 135. On May 7, 2010, the Hobbses called Saxon and inquired about the status of their request for a mortgage modification. 136. sent the Prior to June Hobbses a 9, letter 2010, from 49 Respondent the Law or his agent Office of Jim Kutkowski, P.C., modification authorizing Mr. of the Hobbses' Kutkowski mortgage to negotiate a with Saxon and requesting that the Hobbses complete the authorization. a. On June 2010, 9, authorization the Hobbses form completed the returned and it to Respondent's office. 137. Thereafter, neither Respondent nor Respondent's agents had any further contact with the Hobbses. 138. and keep Respondent failed to communicate with the Hobbses them informed Saxon never about the status of their legal matter. 139. documents from received Respondent or any his loan agents modification concerning the Hobbses' mortgage. 140. Saxon never received any authorization to discuss the Hobbses' mortgage with Respondent or his agents. 141. Neither Respondent nor his agents attempted to engage in any mortgage modification discussions with Saxon about the Hobbses' mortgage. 142. On or about July 17, 2010, the Hobbses spoke to Saxon and discovered that: a. neither had Respondent submitted 50 nor any Respondent's loan agents modification documents to Saxon or attempted to negotiate a modification of the Hobbses' mortgage; and b. the Hobbses' request for a mortgage modification had been denied. 143. Respondent and Respondent's agents failed to act with reasonable diligence and attempt to negotiate a loan modification with Saxon on behalf of the Hobbses. 144. On July 22, Respondent's legal 2010, services the and Hobbses notified terminated Saxon not to discuss their file with Respondent. 145. On July 28, 2010, the Hobbses faxed a completed mortgage modification request to Saxon. 146. By letter dated August 5, 2010, Saxon advised the Hobbses that their request for a mortgage modification had been denied. 147. certified By letter mail, dated from September 2, Hobbses to the 2011, sent Respondent, via the Hobbses: a. explained that they law firm to file retained Respondent's for and negotiate a loan modification with Saxon; b. stated that they paid Respondent's law firm $2,100 for Respondent's legal services; 51 c. advised Respondent regarding loan the forwarded to them Dean Chandler, files modification from a/k/a their that The Law were Office of First American Law, a California law firm; and d. requested that Respondent provide, within one week from the date of their letter: summary of Respondent's legal a work; an explanation why they did not receive a loan modification; an explanation of Respondent's relationship with Dean Chandler et an al.; accounting of Respondent's fee; and a refund of any unearned fee. 148. On September 6, 2011, Respondent's agent received the certified letter from the Hobbses. 149. Respondent failed to: a. b. provide the Hobbses with an accounting; and c. 150. answer the Hobbses' letter; refund Respondent's unearned fee. As a partner in the law firm of Damon K. Roberts and Associates, P.C., Respondent failed to: a. make reasonable efforts conduct assistants of to ensure that Respondent's is 52 compatible the non-lawyer with the professional obligations of the lawyer; and b. make reasonable efforts to ensure that other under lawyers conform their supervision Respondent's conduct to the Rules of Professional Conduct. 151. In an effort to obtain a unearned fee, the Hobbses have refund of Respondent's filed complaints or claims against Respondent with the Pennsylvania Office of Attorney General, Pennsylvania and California client security funds, Pennsylvania and California attorney disciplinary authorities, and Philadelphia Small Claims Court. 152. On December facsimile and first 23, 2011, class mail, ODC a sent Respondent, by letter reminding him of ODC's outstanding request for the Hobbs client file. 153. Respondent did not comply with ODC' s request for the Hobbs client file or provide an explanation as to why he could not produce the requested records. 154. By his through 153 above, conduct as alleged in paragraphs 125 Respondent violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: a. RPC 1. 1, which states that a lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation knowledge, skill, 53 requires the thoroughness legal and preparation reasonably necessary for the representation; b. RPC 1.3, which states that a lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; c. RPC 1.4 (a) (3), shall ~keep which the states client that a reasonably lawyer informed about the status of the matter; d. RPC 1.4 (a) (4), shall keep which the states client that a reasonably lawyer informed about the status of the matter; e. RPC which 1.16(d), states that upon termination of representation, a lawyer shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, which surrendering papers and property. to the client is any advance payment entitled of fee and refunding or expense that has not been earned or incurred. The lawyer may retain papers relating to the client to the extent permitted by other law; 54 f. RPC 5.3(b), which states that with respect to a nonlawyer associated employed with a nonlawyer ensure shall that retained by a lawyer: supervisory direct or having lawyer authority make the over reasonable person's or the efforts conduct to is compatible with the professional obligations of the lawyer; g. RPC 8.4(a), professional which states misconduct that for a it is lawyer to violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional or induce Conduct, another to do knowingly so, or do assist so through the acts of another; and h. RPC B.4(c), professional engage in which states misconduct conduct that for a involving it is lawyer to dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. CHARGE VIII: 155. On June 19, JOHNNIE E. LANCE, III, 2009, John E. Lance, ~TTER Jr. (Decedent) died testate in Philadelphia County. 156. Decedent's Last Will and Testament: a. bequeathed $25,000 to Decedent's E. Lance, III (Lance, III); 55 son, John b. bequeathed and devised the entire residue of Decedent's estate to Carmela Johnson-Br.own (Decedent's foster child); and nominated Ms. Johnson-Brown as Executrix of Decedent's estate. 157. On July 10, 2009, Register of Wills issued Philadelphia the letters County testamentary to Ms. Johnson-Brown at No. 4859-2009. 158. Lance, Decedent's III and Ms. home, Philadelphia, PA 159. Esquire, Ms. to located Johnson-Brown had resided in at 2062 North 62"ct Street, 19151. Johnson-Brown represent retained her in the had concerns Bonnie Ostrofsky, handling of Decedent's about the estate. 160. Lance, Decedent's III death, Ms. Decedent's possessions, Johnson-Brown's and Lance, cause handling of of III's ability to remain in his deceased father's residence. a. On or before December 19, 2009, Lance, III discussed his concerns with Respondent. 161. On December 19, 2009: a. Respondent written retainer provided fee fee agreement of 56 Lance, stating $590, III with that Respondent for a a would represent him "letter in writing and negotiations with" Ms. Ostrofsky; and Lance, III signed the fee agreement. b. 162. On March 5, Orphans' Court of 2010, Ms. Johnson-Brown filed in the Philadelphia County, a Petition For Citation To Show Cause Why Real Estate Of Decedent Should Not Be Sold, which petition was docketed at 1421 No. DE 2009) (Lance, Jr. estate matter). a. The Petition requested that the Court issue III "to show cause why a Citation to Lance, the real estate known as 2 0 62 N. Pennsylvania Philadelphia, properly prepared removal of all for 62nct Street, should sale personal not be including the property and vehicles from the Property, and then sold." 163. with On March 18, another stated that 2010, Respondent provided Lance, III written for following legal opposing counsel fee the Respondent $2,360, agreement; would services: "continue and to attempt get fee agreement provide negotiations DPW waiver. the with Letter writing, advocacy and counsel." 164. Petition On for March 26, Citation, 2010, upon the Orphans' consideration of the Court directed Lance, III to show cause why the Court should not grant the relief 57 requested in the Petition; on May 19, 2010, Respondent filed an Answer. 165. By Order Joseph O'Keefe dated August scheduled a 19, 2010, conference the in the Honorable Lance, Jr. estate matter for September 30, 2010. a. received Respondent a of copy Judge O'Keefe's Order. 166. On August administratively 26, Respondent 2010, suspended from the practice was of law pursuant to Supreme Court Order dated July 27, 2010. 167. failed Upon being administratively suspended, to promptly notify certified mail, return administrative Lance, receipt suspension III, by requested, and Respondent registered or of Respondent's Respondent's consequent inability to act as an attorney. 168. failed with Upon being administratively suspended, to whom notify other persons, Respondent may at Respondent including Ms. any time Ostrofsky, expect to have professional contacts under circumstances where there is a reasonable probability that they may infer that Respondent continued to be an attorney in good standing. 169. Respondent representation of failed Lance, III matter. 58 to in withdraw the Lance, from Jr. his estate 170. On September 13, 2010, Respondent was reinstated to the practice of law in Pennsylvania. By 171. scheduled Order dated the Lance, September Jr. estate 30, 2010, matter for Judge a Keefe hearing on December 7, 2010. a. Respondent received notice of the December 7, 2010 hearing. 172. Respondent December 7, 173. advised Lance, III of the scheduled 2010 hearing. On October 6, 2010, Respondent provided Lance, III with a fee agreement, which stated that for a retainer fee of $2,950, counsel and Respondent ... would prepare for a "negotiate with opposing potential hearing regarding the disposition of assets." 174. Prior Ostrofsky Lance, to agreed Jr. December to estate 7, 2010, Respondent and Ms. a joint continuance of the request matter scheduled failed to for a hearing on December 7, 2010. 175. Respondent informed about Lance, III keep the status of his that the December continued to a later date. 59 7, Lance, III reasonably legal matter and advise 2010 hearing had been 176. 2010, By Decree dated December 8, rescheduled the Lance, Jr. estate matter Judge 0' Keefe for hearing at 10:30 a.m. on January 21, 2011. 177. letter By Respondent advised out closing Ostrofsky his dated III Lance, file, informing 20, January that enclosed her Respondent request to failed withdraw to be would be and wished Lance, III Lance, "the best of luck with the hearing . . Respondent would Ms. letter representing himself at the hearing, 178. [sic], to a that 2010 sent III " file with the Court representation, Respondent's a as required by Pa.R.C.P. 1012(b) (1). 179. Respondent failed to obtain Court's the permission to withdraw from the representation. 180. Respondent January 21, failed to appear on the morning of 2011, to represent Lance, III, at the scheduled hearing in the Lance, Jr. estate matter. 181. Judge As a O'Keefe result delayed of Respondent's the Respondent to his courtroom, obtaining Lance, Jr. the Court's estate scheduled hearing, to appear, summoned admonished Respondent for not permission matter, failure and represent Lance, III. 60 to withdraw ordered that from the Respondent 182. Respondent's failure to follow rules, court obtain the Court's permission to withdraw from the Lance, Jr. estate matter, and timely appear at the scheduled hearing was prejudicial to the administration of justice. 183. Respondent represented Lance, III at the January 21, 2011 hearing. 184. On February 10, 2011, Judge O'Keefe issued a Decree in the Lance, Jr. estate matter; the Decree provided that: a. within must days 45 remove of his the decree, personal Lance, possessions III from 2062 North 62"ct Street, Philadelphia, PA; b. Lance, 62"ct III was permitted to enter 2062 North Street, purposes and of only Philadelphia, removing when his PA, personal accompanied only for property by Ms. Johnson- remove his personal then Ms. Johnson- Brown; and c. if Lance, III did not property within 45 days, Brown may dispose of Lance, III's property, as she saw fit. 185. Respondent received February 10, 2011 Decree. 61 a copy of Judge O'Keefe's 186. Respondent failed to inform Lance, III that Judge O'Keefe had issued the February 10, 2011 Decree or send him a copy of the Decree. 187. By his conduct through 186 above, of Professional as alleged in paragraphs 155 Respondent violated the following Rules Conduct and Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement: a. RPC 1. 1, which states that a lawyer shall provide competent representation to a client. Competent representation knowledge, skill, preparation requires the legal thoroughness reasonably and for necessary the representation; b. RPC 1. 4 (a) ( 3) , shall keep which the states client that a reasonably lawyer informed about the status of the matter; c. 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, in the legal or assist another in doing so; d. RPC 8.4(d), professional which states misconduct 62 for that a it is lawyer to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; e. Pa.R.D.E. wilful 203 (b) (3), violation of which charged in shall be grounds for Enforcement the via that any other provision of the Enforcement Rules, discipline, states subsections Rules through (f) (h) ' infra: f. Pa.R.D.E. which 217(b), formerly admitted notify, or states attorney cause shall be to all pending litigation proceedings, for each clients who and the adverse proceeding, of the administrative are or such disbarment, suspension involved in administrative attorney in by return receipt or party a promptly notified, registered or certified mail, requested, that or attorneys matter or suspension, transfer to inactive status and consequent inability of the formerly admitted attorney to act as an attorney after disbarment, suspension the effective suspension, or transfer to date of the administrative inactive status. The notice to be given to the client shall 63 advise the attorney or formerly the prompt attorneys admitted client counsel substitution not the effective the agency for in which lecfve given to adverse to the of date of it the in The state client shall formerly the court or proceeding shall the the is pending notice to be for an place of attorney or attorneys party residence of withdraw. event administrative to move the the substitute to status, responsibility admitted attorney of the obtain suspension or transfer be In suspension, disbarment, another place attorney. does before in of the of the formerly admitted attorney; g. Pa.R.D.E. formerly notify, 217(c)(l), admitted or cause which states attorney to be disbarment, transfer shall by registered receipt or requested: of the administrative to inactive certified all a promptly notified, suspension, suspension or that status, mail, persons or return their agents or guardians to whom a fiduciary duty is or may be owed 64 at any time after the -. . -.. .. -' .d.±sbaril1~nt,./· . .· s~spens~on, s.uspensiori t;~nsfe~ , ; .--.' ,, ---, -_- .,, or admihisfiativ'e· inaCi;.lv~ ~ta.~us, to ;h~<)~$pon;um.ny. of the ..' ~ttbfn~y to p'ic~ide· formerly adll}lti;.ed · the p.otice requ.i:led. by thi.$ ·subdivision shall continue for as long as formerly the admitted suspended, disbarred, attorney is. administratively suspended or on inactive status; and h. Pa.R.D\E .. 217(c)(2), formerly notify, admitted or suspension by to or transfer or time of the administrative to all a promptly notified, inactive certified receipt requested: any be shall suspension, registered whom the states· that attorney cause disbarment, which status, mail, return other persons with formerly admitted attorney may at 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. formerly notice continue The admitted required for by as 65 responsibility attorney this long to of the provide the subdivision as the shall formerly admitted attorney is administratively disbarred, suspended or suspended, on inactive status. III. JOINT RECOMMENDATION FOR DISCIPLINE 188. the Petitioner and Respondent appropriate discipline jointly recommend that Respondent's for admitted misconduct is a thirty-month suspension. 189. being Respondent imposed by Attached to Affidavit the required consents to this the hereby consents Supreme Petition by to court of discipline Pennsylvania. Respondent's is Pa.R.D.E. the 215(d), recommended discipline executed stating and that including mandatory acknowledgements contained in Pa.R.D.E. he the 215(d) (1) through (4). 190. Petitioner and Respondent respectfully submit that there is the following aggravating factor: a. Respondent has been a defendant in a myriad of civil lawsuits and criminal actions, which involve: 1. creditors owed, as seeking follows: foreclosure $2,867.49 to PA state taxes 66 $213,653 judgment judgment collect for (July money mortgage 7, 2009), failing to pay (May 4, 2012), $1,343.26 judgment for failing service (April to pay for 2012), 2 6, gas $924.96 judgment for failing to pay gas service (June 18, 2011), $2,659.30 complaint for non-payment of office rent 2012), $250.00 and (May 16, complaint failing to pay water bill for (October 15, 2007); 2. clients suing for malpractice (filed March 29, 2012 and August 5, 2011), and return of unearned (complaint November 30, legal 2011; fees $6,186.50 judgment entered January 18, 2012; Writ of Execution, 3/30/2012); 3. motor vehicle with code violations, Suspended (April Vehicle 27, 2012), Without Responsibility Failing Vehicle to (September 3, Registration Operating a Required (December Stop 2001), Driving at Motor Financial 29, Red a 2011), Signal and Speeding (July 2, 2001); and 4. criminal Arrest, arrest charges Aggravated 67 of Assault, Resisting Disorderly Conduct (March conviction 3, 2002), and Park After for criminal Dark (September 5, 2002). 191. Respondent and ODC respectfully submit that there are the following mitigating factors: By virtue of Discipline a. on expressed signing this Respondent has Respondent's Consent, recognition of his violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct; and b. Respondent's active involvement in community betterment programs and Association committees forth Philadelphia Respondent's in as more Bar fully Curriculum set Vitae attached hereto as Exhibit "A. ¢ For 192. variety of small over three years, attorney disciplinary law firm that Respondent rules focused on real violated while a operating a estate and land use matters. In clients' made client cases, matters, failed misrepresentations neglect, the five to to Respondent communicate his neglected with clients to his his clients, conceal his and made misrepresentations to his clients about status legal fees. of their cases in order to obtain additional The Supreme Court often imposes a suspension 68 of one year and one day on attorneys, like Respondent, who have no record of discipline, but engage in serial neglect coupled with misrepresentations to O:f:fice o:f Discipl.inary Counsel. v. DB 2003, D.Bd. 8/30/2005) (Supreme suspension on Goldman, made imposed a e.g., See, No. Howard Gol.dman, 5/20/2005 Rpt. Court clients. 157 Order (S.Ct. one-year-and-one-day who neglected four client matters, misrepresentations to conceal the neglect in two matters, failed to communicate with his clients, and failed to promptly surrender Discipl.inary Counsel. 14 Pa. D. &C. 4th recommended a his v. 597, unearned fee); No. David DeJ.:iman, W. 608 suspension (1992) (the of one and O:f:fice 91 DB 1990, Disciplinary year and o:f one Board day for Deliman's misconduct, reasoning that such discipline is the "appropriate sanction for of cases neglect and misrepresentation even where no prior discipline has been administered"; the Supreme Court adopted the Board's recommendation) . In addition to Respondent's misrepresentations to his clients, pleadings Respondent filed in misrepresentations his failing to made the to the timely misrepresentations Scott court file a matter. were motion in Respondent's drafted to to open judgment and an answer to a motion for summary 69 court disguise a default judgment. Respondent's in at false least Disciplina~ a statements to a three-month Counsel v. No. Larason, (S.Ct. falsified Schedule of Creditors court relied upon the should result Cf. suspension. 5/21/2004 which tribunal O££ice 1 DB 2002, o£ D.Bd. Rpt. Order 8/19/2004) (attorney who submitted a to in the District dismissing a Court, lawsuit, received a suspension of three months). Respondent also engaged in the unauthorized practice of law from August 26, 2010 until September 13, 2010, while he was on administrative suspension for failing to fulfill During this his continuing legal education requirements. nineteen-day time period, his law firm, Respondent continued to operate communicate with clients, use letterhead that stated "Damon K. Roberts & Associates, Real Estate/Land Use Attorneys," and hold himself out to third parties as being an attorney authorized to practice law in Pennsylvania. Although Respondent did not withdraw from court cases where he was attorney of record, Respondent did not appear in court on any of these matters during the time period of his administrative suspension. Precedent indicates that Respondent's. limited acts of unauthorized practice of law, spanning than a an equally six-month limited time suspension. period, merits See O:f:fice o:f 70 no more Disciplina~ v. Counsel No. Buffington, 45 DB Rpt. D.Bd. 2004, 6/22/2005, pp. 10-11 (S.Ct. Order 9/20/2005). Furthermore, Respondent mishandled funds and Respondent routinely placed mismanaged his bank accounts. retainer fees client directly into his operating account without obtaining his clients' written informed consent not to hold their fees in Respondent's escrow account were earned or expenses were until the fees On one occasion, incurred. Respondent transferred funds from his operating account to his escrow account. and commingle carelessness" receive a Discipline for attorneys who mismanage "product funds as a without an "intent minimum suspension Discipl.inary Counsel. v. of to six Wil.l.iam B. of neglect steal" months. Gu:f:fey, and generally O:f:fice 17 Pa. o:f D. &C. 4th 170, 187-188 (1992). Respondent's mishandling knowingly depositing signature into his a of funds settlement escrow account. extended check In with the to a his forged Pitt matter, Respondent received a $25,000 settlement check made payable to both Larry Pitt, Esquire, and Respondent. Respondent or his back agent settlement forged Mr. Pitt's check and Respondent Respondent's escrow account. notify Mr. name to the deposited· the of the check into Respondent failed to promptly Pitt of Respondent's receipt of the 71 settlement check and to settlement funds. Respondent Cf. No. to Mr. Pitt Respondent's receive suspension. Sitoski, deliver an 77 DB 93, of requires the that one-year-and-one-day Discip~inary 34 Pa. share misconduct additional O:f:fice o:f his Counse~ D.&C.4th 214 v. Robert (1996) (attorney who engaged in deceptive conduct to avoid paying a referral fee to another lawyer received a suspension of one year). 193. Based on precedent, the amount of discipline that should be imposed for Respondent's multifarious misdeeds is a three-year Counse~ v. suspension. Susan 12/16/2002 (S.Ct. Be~~ Bo~no, Order Discip~inary Compare O:f:fice o:f No. 162 DB 2000, 3/7/2003) (attorney D.Bd. who Rpt. neglected four client matters, made misrepresentations to conceal her neglect, violated attorney registration regulations, to make restitution discipline, to clients, and had received a two-year suspension), Discip~inary Counse~ 2003 DB & 110 2004, Danie~ v. D.Bd. E. Rpt. no record suspension for neglect, Hou~ihan, Nos. 1/4/2006 (S.Ct. lack of of with O:f:fice o:f 3/28/2006) (attorney with no record of discipline four-year failed 208 DB Order received communication, and knowingly making false statements to a tribunal). 194. Counsel Respondent's and not cooperation insignificant with Disciplinary charitable contributions should temper this three-year suspension recommendation by 72 six months. W. See O££ice o£ Disciplinary Counsel 695 Chung, A. 2d 405, 407-408 (Pa. v. Daniel 1997) (Chung's significant history of service to the Korean community and admission of Accordingly, misconduct a mitigated discipline thirty-month suspension is the imposed) . appropriate quantum of discipline to be imposed to protect the public from this patently unfit practitioner. 195. 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 approve of the Discipline Joint on 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 thirty-month suspension; and .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 of the paid 73 Petition, by and Respondent that all before the imposition of discipline under Pa.R.D.E. 215 (g). Respectfully and jointly submitted, OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL PAUL J. KILLION CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL Date Date By r--+~--~----~----~~?F-- Harriet R. Brumberg Disciplinary Counsel By ~~~~~~~~--~--~----- Damon K. Roberts, Esquire Respondent By Date Counsel for 74 osenberg, Es spondent ,, '« Damon K. Roberts 1700 Reed Street, Philadelphia, PA 19146 (267) 972-2451 dkrlawtirm@gmajl.com ATTORNEY AT LAW EQUCATION 5/0 I Howard University S~hool of Law, Washington, DC, Juris Doctor Degree Honors: Call Award, Top Student In Land Finance; Who's Who In American Colleges and Universities; Dean's Leadership Team. Activities: President: Graduate Student Assembly; Member: Trial Advocacy Moot Court Team; Writer: Howard Law Newspaper; Participant: Study Abroad Program in South Africa. Columbia University, Teachers College, New York, NY, Magna Cum Laude Coursework In M.A. Program, Comparative/International Education, focus: politics, Thesis Pending. S/98 Activities: President: Black Student Network; Senator: Student Government. Harvard College, Cambridge, MA, Cum Laude B.A. Degree, Sociology/Afro-American Studies. 6/93 Honors: Summa Cum Laude Thesis, Divinity School Undergraduate Fellow, Ford Foundation Research Fellow, Boylston Speaking Prize, Rhodes Scholarship Finalist. Activities: President Caribbean Students Association; Founder/President: Boston Caribbean Students Coalition; Writer: Diaspora Magazine, Testimonials; Anthology ofBlacl!; Collegiate Scholars; Actor: Harvard Drama Society; Service: Phillips Brooks House. Sports: Varsity Track and Field, Rugby, Freshman Football, Intramural Tennis. EXPERIENCE Damon K. Roberts & Associates, Philadelphia, PA 6/01-Present Attorney at Law, Own and operate a legal practice focused on real estate and land use matters, including acquisitions and disposition of residential and commercial property, investor counsel, the composition and review of transactional documents, condos, closings, landlord-tenant court, zoning. Work with clients to acquire government-controlled properties and to navigate government housing agencies. Consult with non· profit and community development corporations. Certified housing counselor. State Representative Candidate, 181ft District, Philadelphia, PA 1/12-4/12 i/11-5/ll(Pniled Out ofRace); i/07-5/07 City CoQncil Candidate, 2"d District, Philadelphia, PA Philadelphia Housing Allthority, Philadelphia. PA 4/04-12/06 Community Ombudsman. Chaired the Landlord Tenant Advisory Board. Administrator for over 80 administrative hearings per month. Coordinated customer satisfaction of public officials, as well as 45,000 residents and 7,000 landlords on the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Program. Ensured program compliance with HUO Regulations. Taught landlord and tenant briefings. Responded to over 3000 executive, satellite and walk in complaints yearly. Composed official matetials and wrote/edited correspondence for Executive Director and General Manager. Administered community service efforts. Spoke at community events. Philadelphia 21'1 Century Review Forum, Philadelphia, PA 12/03-3/04 Staff Coordinator, Program Evaluation Committee. Mayor's Transition Team. Coordinated the efforts of 46 volunteers in five subcommittees to produce a think tank report aimed at increasing the eff'el:tiveness of Mayor Street's Child Welfare, Education, Neighborhood Transformation Initiative, Safe Streets Program and implementing the recommendations of the Philadelphia Tax Refunn Commission into his second tenn. Friends of John F. Street, Re-Election Campaign, Phlladelphia, PA 9/03-12/03 Deputy Campaign Manager. Assisted Campaign Manager in daily duties, assisting in all departments of the campaign. Coordinated legal suit against oppollent. Assembled and organized the legal teatn for Election Day. Tracked Mayor's Campaign Commitments. Tracked aud thanked over 20,000 people on behalf of the Mayor. Organized rallies and meetings with officials and constituents. Attachment "A" City of Philadelphia Law Department, Philadelphia, PA 8/02·9/03 Assistant City Solicitor, Mayor's Honors Attorneys Program. Litigation regarding Neighborhood Transfonnation Initiative program: demolition and eminent domain. Negotiated and litigated environmental matters, including consent agreements and plan approvals with Sunoco. Monitored Superfund sites and lend reduction In school drinking water. Set up public hearings, wrote and researched for the Gas Commission, Mayor's Task Force for Auto Insurance Rate Reduction Task Force and Air Management Services. Promoted attorney involvement in Community Affairs and Pro Bono Work. Contraet Attorney, Kelly L11w Registry, Philadelphia, PA Primarily Involved In document review at lt·on Mountain and Dupont In Delawllfe. 1/02-7/02 DaUer, Greenberg & Dietrich, Fort Washington, PA 8/01·12/01 Attorney at Law, Worked on premises liability and tobacco lttlgation: prepared answers to complaints, responded to interrogatories and requests lbr production of documents, provided legal research, prepared motions to compel, observed and summarized depositions, conducted a site inspection, attended expert witness interviews, interviewed clients. Participated in federal trial. International Churches of Christ, Los Angeles, CA Summer '00 Law Clerk, Wrote risk management memoranda on premises liability issues; suggested policy revisions regarding children infected with HIV; perfonned background research on attorneys that local churches sought to retain; set up lexus-nexus searches for General Counsel. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC Summer '00 Law Clerk, Clallns and Property Department of the Finance and Operations Law Office. Advised EPA about condemnations and just compensation; researched CAMU administrative sanctions; addressed Office of General Counsel Attorneys about Diversity Issues on Civil Rights Panel. Brennan Center for Justice, New York, NY Summer '99 Law Clerk. Helped edit Center's Campaign Finance Manual; researched legislative actions regarding when suppressing free speech was held unconstitntional because of improper legislative motive; conducted Research on Legislative Facts; Participated in weekly NAACP and PRLDF Discussions. Xerox Corporatlon/T.E.C. Agency, New York, NY 8/97-8/98 Sales Agent, Expanded Xerox's customer copier, printer and fax machine base in New York's garment district; conducted training sessions; maintained records and customer satisfaction for over 300 clients. Rlee High School, Harlem, NY . 8/95-9/97 Global History Teacher. Taught African, Asian and Middle Eastern History to 9th Grade Stndents in two year World Studies Program. Track and Fleid Head Coaeh. Developed national class sprint team; instructed weight lifting, planned.workout schedules, team budgets and out of state trips; encouraged proper diet and stndy habits. Sheltering Arms Children's Services, New York, NY 1195-6/95 Social Worker. Counseled caseioad of teenage girls facilitating educational, medical and psychological help to promote reunion with their families; supervised Child Care Workers. PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS Board Member: Housing Association of the Delaware Valley, Parent Leadership Academy. Barristers' Assoclation·ofPhilndelphia: President 2004-2005. Philadelphia Bar Association: Judicial Commission for Selection and Retention; Young Lawyers Division: Executive Committee; Co-Chair: Resolutions Committee, Co-Chair: Legal Line; City Policy, Pnblic Interest Lawyers, Problems of the Homeless, Government and Public Service Committees. Pennsylvania Bar Association: Minority Bar Committee. r ( POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT State Representative Candidate, Philadelphia, PA City Council Candidate, Philadelphia, PA Chair: South Phllly for Obama Volunteer: Michael Nutter for Mayor. Candidate: Philadelphia City Council, District 2. Community Outreach Director: Philadelphia Young Democrats; Political Fellow 2005·2006: Center for Progressive Leadership (CPL); South Philadelphia Coordinator: Neighborhood Networks; Volunteer: Rendell for Governor, Casey for Senate, Tony Payton, Jr. tbr State Representative; Deputy Campaign Manager: 2003 Re-Election Campaign, Friends of John F. Street; Volunteer: Ruth Messinger for Mayor, New York City; Volunteer: C. Virginia Fields for Manhattan Borough President, New York City. EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP Chair, South Philadelphia Neighborhood Networks; Chair, Social Action Committee, Philadelphia; President, Barristers' Association of Philadelphia; President, Graduate Students' Assembly, Howard University; President, Black Stodent Network, Teachers College, Columbia; Head Coach, Track and Field, Rice High School, Harlem; President, Caribbean Students Coalition, Harvard University; Pt·esident, Student Government Organization, Brooklyn Technical High School. PROFESSIONAL AWARDS State Citation for Excellence in Community Service, 2009 "LaWyers on the Fast Track 2005" - Legal !ntelligencer Newspaper I American Lawyer Media. "I 0 People under 40 to watch in 2005" - Philadelphia Tribune Magazine. BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner No. 59 DB 2012 v. Atty. Reg. No. 88261 DAMON K. ROBERTS, Respondent (Philadelphia) AFFIDAVIT UNDER RULE 215(d), Pa.R.D.E. Respondent, Damon K. Roberts, hereby states that he consents to the imposition of a suspension for a period of thirty months, and further states that: 1. he is His not consent being is freely subjected to and voluntarily coercion or rendered; duress; he is fully aware of the implications of submitting the consent; and he has consulted with counsel in connection with the decision to consent to discipline; 2. He is aware that there is presently pending a proceeding involving allegations that he has been guilty of misconduct as set forth in the Joint Petition; 3. He acknowledges that the material facts set forth in the Joint Petition are true; and 4. continue He knows that if the charges pending against him to be prosecuted in the pending proceeding, could not successfully defend Damon K. Roberts, Esquire Respondent Sworn to and subscribed before me this 1 fL da~ of ~ ,L~Y(Mk_ , 2012. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA . NOiARIAL SEAL ROSEMARY B. CULLEN, Notary Public City o!Philac.lelphla, Phlla. County ~.MY..Commlss\QIL~pites.J.uly..22.lll:IL.... 2 he B8FORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPR8ME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner No. 59 DB 2012 v. Atty. Reg. No. 88261 DAMON K. ROBERTS, Respondent (Philadelphia) VERIFICATION The Petition 215(d), statements In Support contained of in Discipline the on foregoing Consent Joint Under Rule Pa.R.D.E., are true and correct to the best of our knowledge or information and belief and are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904, relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. 8~,JJ,.};;. o r'2- By Date Harriet R. Brumberg Disciplinary Counsel g /:7-/1-z- By Date Z£(J Damon K. Roberts, Esquire Respondent g17 (,~ By Date Counsel

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.