In re Solomon

In re Solomon  (95-280); 164 Vt 602; 664 A.2d 274

[Filed 25-Jul-1995]


                                     ENTRY ORDER

                           SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 95-280

                                    JUNE TERM, 1995


In re Alan M. Solomon, Esq.                   }         Original Jurisdiction
                                              }
                                              }
                                              }
                                              }

       In the above-entitled cause,  the Clerk will enter:

       Alan M. Solomon having been reprimanded by the Statewide Grievance
  Committee of the State of Connecticut, and all reprimands in that state
  being public, Alan M. Solomon is hereby publicly reprimanded.  A.0. 9, Rule
  17D.



                          BY THE  COURT:


                          Frederic W. Allen, Chief Justice

                          Ernest W. Gibson III, Associate Justice

                          John A. Dooley, Associate Justice

                          James L. Morse,   Associate Justice

                          Denise R. Johnson, Associate Justice

[x] Publish

[ ] Do Not Publish


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                           STATE OF CONNECTICUT              Daniel B. Horwitch
                                                          Statewide Bar Counsel
                                                              (203) 568-5157

                        STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE

                          Second Floor - Suite Two
           287 Main Street, East Hartford, Connecticut 06118-1885




04/20/95

   LORRAINE MORGANTI                    ALAN M SOLOMON
   30 RIVER VIEW COURT                  SOLOMON KRUPNIKOFF &
   CHESHIRE          CT  06410          35 PLEASANT STREET
                                        P. 0. BOX 835
                                        MERIDEN           CT 06450

   RE:  GRIEVANCE COMPLAINT #93-0408
        MORGANTI vs.  SOLOMON

   Dear Complainant & Respondent:

       The  Statewide  Grievance  Committee  has  carefully   studied   the
  record of  the  above-referenced  grievance  complaint,  including  the
  proposed decision  of  the  reviewing  committee,  which  conducted  a
  hearing in this matter on July 14,  1994.  Based  upon  its  review  of the
  record, the  Statewide  Grievance  Committee,  at  a  meeting  held on
  April 20, 1995, has  decided  to  adopt  the  proposed  decision  of the 
  reviewing  committee.     Accordingly,  the  Respondent,  Alan   M.
  Solomon,   is    hereby   REPRIMANDED  by   the   Statewide   Grievance
  Committee.


                                            Sincerely,

                                            Daniel B. Horwitch

  cc:  Attorney John H. Welch Jr


                        STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE

  Lorraine Morganti
       Complainant                  :

     vs.                            :  Grievance Complaint #93-0408

  Allan Solomon
       Respondent                   :



                              PROPOSED DECISION

       Pursuant  to  Practice  Book  Section 27a,  the   undersigned,   duly-
  appointed reviewing committee of the  Statewide  Grievance  Committee
  conducted a hearing at the  Superior  Court,  95  Washington  Street,
  Hartford, Connecticut on July 14, 1994.  The  hearing  addressed  the
  record of -the complaint filed on November 2, 1993 and  the  probable cause
  determination rendered by  the  Statewide  Grievance  on  April 21,  1994, 
  finding  that  there  existed  probable  cause  that  the Respondent
  violated Rules 1.3 and 8.4(c) and  (d)  of  the  Rules  of Professional
  Conduct.  The  Statewide  Grievance  Committee's  finding of probable cause
  was contrary to the finding of  no  probable  cause filed by the grievance
  panel for the Judicial District of New  Haven at Geographical Areas 7 & 8.

       Notice of the hearing was mailed to the Complainant and  to  the
  Respondent on May 31, 1994.     The  Complainant  and  the  Respondent
  appeared and were heard by this reviewing committee.

       This Reviewing Committee finds  the  following  facts  by  clear and
  convincing evidence:

       The Respondent's firm represented the Complainant in  a  divorce
  action that was finalized on September 30, 1993.      In   connection with
  the divorce, property in Cheshire, Connecticut was  conveyed  to the
  Complainant from Richard Morganti  by  quit  claim  deed.  On  or about
  October 19, 1993 the Complainant was informed by  the  Cheshire town
  clerk's office that the deed had not been recorded.       The Complainant
  requested the deed for recording  from  the  Respondent's office  but  was 
  informed  the   file   needed   to   be   reviewed. Subsequently,  the 
  Respondent's   office   offered   to   give   the Complainant the
  unrecorded deed in  exchange  for  a  check  for  the balance of the
  Complainant's bill.       The  Respondent  informed  an office assistant
  not to release the deed until  after  he  was  paid. By letter dated
  November 1, 1993 the Respondent  forwarded  the  deed conveying the
  Cheshire property to  the  Complainant  for  recording.
 
       This reviewing committee finds the following violations  of  the Rules
  of Professional Conduct by clear and convincing evidence:

  


       This  reviewing  committee  concludes   that   the   Respondent
  intentionally neglected to  timely  record  the  Complainant's  deed
  because of a claim for legal fees in  violation  of  Rules  1.3  and 8.4(d)
  of the Rules of Professional Conduct.  It is  the  opinion  of this
  reviewing committee that by retaining the deed, the  Respondent prejudiced
  the  rights  of  the  Complainant  by.  exposing  her  to possible harm. 
  The committee noted a lack of advance notice  to  the Complainant that the
  deed would not  be  recorded  without  payment. Since  we  conclude  that 
  the  Respondent  violated  the  Rules  of Professional Conduct, we 
  recommend  that  the  Statewide  Grievance Committee reprimand the
  Respondent.
  

                                       Attorney Suzanne E. Caron

                                       Ms. Nan K. Crowley