Craig S. Jepson (2006)

He was admitted to the New Hampshire Bar on January 18, 2005. Since his admission, Mr Jepson I Respondent Craig S Jepson is an attorney licensed to practice law in New Hampshire

and Assistant Disciplinary Counsel James 1. Kruse: offacts as stipulated to by Respondent Craig S .. Jepson, his counsel Alpiar G Saunders, Jr, Esquire The PIOfessionai Conduct Committee determined the record supports the following findings I. FACTUAL FINDINGS

F mther, the Committee appIOved the Stipulation as to facts, IUles violated, sanction and costs Permit Waiver of Service and Hearings Committee Process filed by the Attorney Discipline Office The Professional Conduct Committee, upon consideration, granted the Assented to Motion to absent. Richard H. Darling, Gretchen Rule Hamel, and David N Page .. Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair, was Cronheim, Gerald A Daly, Thomas P Connail, Ellen L Arnold, James R Martin, David N. Cole, Committee Panel consisted of Margaret H. Nelson, Chair, Toni M. Gray, Vice Chair, Alan J G Saunders, Jr, Esquire, appeared for the Respondent, Craig S Jepson. The Professional Conduct James L. KIuse, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel appeared for the Attorney Discipline Office .. Alpiar the above-referenced matter pursuant to New Hampshire Supreme Comt Rule 37A(III)(d)(2)(B). On November 21,2006, the Professional Conduct Committee considered OIal arguments in

Jepson, Craig S advs Attorney Di>cipline Office # 06-023

Alan J Cronheim Holly B .. Fazzino, Admin Coordinator Thomas P Connair * non attorney member David N Cole David N. Page' Ellen 1 . Arnold James R Martin Toni M Gray,' Vice Chair 603-224-5828. Fax 228-9511 Gretchen Rule Hamel Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Richard H. Darling' Margaret H Nelson, Chair 4 Park Street, Suite 304 Gerald A. Daley'

misconduct did not prejudice Mr. Johnson's candidacy. 10 Mr.. Johnson was granted temue by unanimous vote of the committee Mr Jepson's no harm" of April 6, p. 2 2006, he stated as follows:"That was stupid and willful, but please believe this: I meant Mr.. Jepson immediately admitted his misconduct and apologized to the entire faculty In his message 9. Once established by committee members that Mr.. Jepson's report was a fabrication, Jepson reiterated falsely that he had attended Mr Johnson's classes Johnson's classes.. Further, in response to initial informal inquiries of other committee members, Mr. 8. The aforementioned report was a fabrication. Mr Jepson had not attended any ofMr Johnson's performance and qualifications students' response.. He offered one point of criticism, but was generally very complimentary ofMr deSClibed th.e classes in detail, including the su~jects covered, the nature of assign_111ents, and observations ofMr Johnson's Criminal Procedure classes of FeblUary 6 and 1 p. 3 3,2006 Mr. Jepson 7. Mr Jepson prepared and submitted a report to Ms.. Kirkland describing his committee chair, Professor Kimberly Kirkland. to attend classes conducted by Mr Johnson and to submit a report of his observations to the 6. Among other responsibilities as a member of the committee, Mr Jepson was required responsible, and competent attorneys.. Pierce Law is an integral part of the Pierce Law program designed to produce well-educated, 5. The process of reviewing the performance and qualifications of law professors at connection with Mr Johnson's application for tenure committee charged with assessing the performance and qualifications of Professor Chris Johnson in 4.. For the academic year 2005-2006, Mr.. Jepson was appointed to serve on a faculty May 22, 2006 3.. Mr. Jepson responded to the faculty report in his letters to the ADO dated May 18 and based upon a report fiom members of the faculty of Pierce Law dated April 21, 2006 2.. The subject complaint is undertaken by the Attorney Discipline Office ("ADO") New Hampshire ("Pierce Law"). Jepson worked full-time as a tenmed professor oflaw at the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord, education requirements of the New Hampshire Bar. At all times material to this proceeding, Mr. has remained in good standing with respect to all financial obligations and continuing legal 3

New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct SA(a) misconduct as set forth above, there is necessarily clear and convincing evidence of a violation of IS. Because there exists clear and convincing evidence that Mr Jepson engaged in

17. Mr. Jepson's misconduct involved dishonesty and/or misrepresentation. Pierce Law views regarding the tenure consideration process and other conditions and issues he perceived at 16. Mr. Jepson's aforementioned actions were undertaken in response to his personal in conjunction with Mr Johnson's application for tenure at Pierce Law. about his performance and credentials, knowing that his reported observations would be considered 15 Mr Jepson lied about attending classes of Mr. Johnson and making observations Pierce Law. responsible for determining whether Mr. Johnson should be granted tenure as a professor at 14. Mr. Jepson prepared and filed a false report to a committee at Pierce Law that was 1 p. 3 3 The allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference.

violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: Conduct Committee concludes that there is clear and convincing evidence that Craig P. Jepson has Having found the above-listed facts by clear and convincing evidence, the Professional II. RULINGS OF LAW

where he plans to reside and practice law. 12 Mr.. Jepson has resigned from the filCulty of Pierce Law He has moved to Texas well qualified for tenure.. further represents that he was fiuniliar with the Mr lohnson's teaching skills and believed he was the subject conduct in his May IS, 2006, letter to the ADO, attached hereto as Exhibit A ML Jepson II. Mr.. Jepson has described his personal circumstances and his reasons fll! engaging in p. 4 4

to Mr Jepson for violating New Hampshire Rules of Professional Conduct, Rules 8 . p. 4 4( c) and 8 4(a) For the above reasons, the Professional Conduct Committee voted to issue a Public Censur e IV. CONCLUSION

approptiately addresses Mr. Jepson's acknowledged misconduct Conduct Committee believes that a Public Censure is warranted in this case The sanction resigned from the faculty of Franklin Pierce Law Center. Under these circurustances, the Professional demonstrated genuine r emor se in connection with this matter It should be noted that he also has reflects that Mr.. Jepson has not been the subject of any prior complaints and, at this point, has in his initial response to the grievance which was filed in this matter The stipulated record also further questioned did he acknowledge his misstatement. Further, Mr. Jepson minimized his conduct he repeated the false information in a conversation with a Committee member Only after being knowingly submitted a false report to the Tenure Committee. When questioned about this statement, sanction which was submitted as part ofthe stipulation The Committee considered that MI. Jepson The Professional Conduct Committee considered the parties' analysis of the appropriate Standards, the Court has considered them when imposing sanctions). Case, 1 p. 4 49 NH. 132, 139 (2003)(noting that, although the Court has never formally adopted these Professional Responsibility, Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (1991), See, e g. Shillen's e.. g. Feld's Case, 149 N H. 19,28 (2002). This sanction is also in accord with the ABA Center for with the purposes of attorney discipline as described by the New Hampshire Supreme Court, See, concludes that the appropriate discipline in this matter is a Public Censure. This sanction is in accord Having made the afore-referenced findings and rulings, the Professional Conduct Committee III. SANCTION p. 5 5

File Arpiar G. Saunders, Jr., Esquire James L. Kruse, Assistant Disciplinary Counsel Distribution:

Decembel ?-.\, 2006 , -v . -" f~··/l - -

Hampshire Supreme Court. signing the Stipulation, Mr. Jepson has waived his light to appeal this decision to the New Mr Jepson is assessed all costs associated with the investigation and prosecution ofthis matter By