Craig N. Salomon (2007)

the Complainant, Bernice C. Billewicz, in a probate matter pending in Rockingham 2. From August 2002 through July 2003, the Respondent, Craig N. Salomon, represented Woodland Road, North Hampton, New Hampshire 03862. Hampton, New Hampshire 03842. Mr. Salomon's current physical address is: 100 utilized the following address: Law Office of Craig N. Salomon, 750 Exeter Road, was admitted to practice in 1973. At times material to this proceeding, Mr. Salomon has 1. Mr. Salomon is an attorney licensed to practice law in New Hampshire. Mr. Salomon

following Findings of Fact by clear and convincing evidence: The Professional Conduct Committee has determined that the record supports the

Tenn, Jr., abstained. Cronheim and David N. Cole were absent, Toni M. Gray, Vice Chair, was recused, and James J. Thomas P. Connair, Gerald A. Daley, James R. Martin, and David N. Page, Reporter. Alan J. Nelson, Chair, Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair, Richard H. Darling, Gretchen Rule Hamel, proposed Stipulation of Facts, Rules Violated and Sanction. Members present were Margaret H. McCafferty, Disciplinary Counsel. The Professional Conduct Committee voted to accept the Craig N. Salomon, Esquire through his counsel Russell F. Hilliard, Esquire, and Landya B. captioned matter on a Stipulation of Facts, Rules Violated and Sanction jointly proposed by On August 21, 2007, the Professional Conduct Committee deliberated the above­

Salomon, Craig N advs. Bernice C. Billewicz # 03-072

Gerald A. Daley* Holly B. Fazzino, Admin. Coordinator Alan J. Cronheim * non attorney member Thomas P. Connair James J. Tenn, Jr. David N. Cole David N. Page* Toni M. Gray, * Vice Chair 603-224-5828. Fax 228-9511 James R. Martin Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Gretchen Rule Hamel Margaret H. Nelson, Chair 4 Chenell Drive, Suite 102 Richard H. Darling*

letter, Ms. Billewicz asserted that, in addition to the $1,204.62 credit, Mr. Salomon 11. By letter dated July 7,2003, Ms. Billewicz requested. a refund of her money. In that $1,204.62. was dated May 29,2003. That invoice indicated that Ms. Billewicz had a credit of 10. Prior to his termination, the most recent invoice Mr. Salomon had sent to Ms. Billewicz he should have placed this money in a trust account rather than his operating account. payments for legal work Mr. Salomon had not yet performed. Mr. Salomon concedes that 9. Mr. Salomon concedes that each of Ms. Billewicz's retainer payments were advance servIces. Salomon represent her. On May 30,2003, Ms. Billewicz terminated Mr. Salomon's 8. In or around May 2003, Ms. Billewicz determined that she no longer wished to have Mr. account rather than his operating account. Salomon had not yet performed. Mr. Salomon should have placed this money in a trust 7. Each of Ms. Billewicz's retainer payments were advance payments for legal work Mr. at the Bank of New Hampshire, Account #902-9302249. 6. Mr. Salomon deposited each of the above retainer payments into his Operating Account 5. At no time did Mr. Salomon deposit these retainer payments into a client trust account.

04/21/03 $2,751.51 01122/03 $2,000.00 11120/02 $2,000.00 08/20102 $2,000.00

Date Amount

4. Specifically, Ms. Billewicz made the following payments to Mr. Salomon as retainers: the representation. 3. Ms. Billewicz paid Mr. Salomon a total of$8,751.51 in retainer fees over the course of 2002. County Probate Court. Mr. Salomon entered his Appearance in that matter on August 20, p. 3 Page 3 of5

account rather than his operating account. Salomon had not yet performed. Mr. Salomon should have placed this money in a trust 18. Each of Mr. Billewicz' s retainer payments were advance payments for legal work Mr. $8,751.51) into his operating accounts rather than into a client trust account. 17. Specifically, Mr. Salomon placed all of Ms. Billewicz's retainer amounts (totaling holding in connection with his representation of her. 16. Mr. Salomon failed to separate and safeguard the assets of Ms. Billewicz that he was 15. Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference.

N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(a)(I), Supreme Court Rule 50(2)(B) and (C), and 8.4(a). following Rule violations as stipulated, by clear and convincing evidence: The Professional Conduct Committee has determined that the record supports the

Account #924-987929. written on Mr. Salomon's second Operating Account at Bank of New Hampshire, the check reads"retainer refund." The check was not written on a trust account; it was On that date, Mr. Salomon wrote Ms. Billewicz a check for $1,204.62. The memo line of 14. On August 18,2003, Mr. Salomon received a copy of Ms. Billewicz's complaint letter. made allegations of professional misconduct against Mr. Salomon. 13. By letter to the Professional Conduct Committee dated August 14,2003, Ms. Billewicz that, as of his termination, he was holding $1,204.62 of Ms. Billewicz's money. 12. While Mr. Salomon disputed Ms. Billewicz's entitlement to $1,390.47, he did not dispute 2003. Ms. Billewicz requested a total refund of$I,390.47. should refund her for what she deemed"unsatisfactory" service during the month of May p. 4 Page 4 of5

case, however, The Committee agreed that a Public Censure is a more appropriate sanction. Suspension on the basis of his prior record might be appropriate. Under the circumstances of this misconduct in the instant case after having received the Public Censure and Warning in 2005, a dates both the prior Public Censure and the 2005 Warning. Had Mr. Salomon committed the Public Censure to a Suspension. Furthermore, Mr. Salomon's misconduct in the instant case pre­ While this history is an aggravating factor, it is not of a nature to raise the baseline sanction of a dated June 16, 1998, a Public Censure dated May 24,2005, and a Warning dated June16, 2005. The Committee notes that Mr. Salomon has a prior disciplinary history of a Warning Standards Section 4.13.) misconduct. As such, a Public Censure in this case is more appropriate than a suspension. (See Billewicz's money falls more into the realm of negligence, than the realm of intentional The Committee agrees with Disciplinary Counsel that Mr. Salomon's handling of Mrs. Public Censure. concludes that the appropriate discipline in this matter is to adopt the stipulated sanction of a Having made the above findings and rulings, the Professional Conduct Committee

Conduct 8.4(a). rules, there is necessarily clear and convincing evidence of a violation ofN.H. R. Prof. 21. Because there exists clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Salomon violated the above

as N.H. Sup. Ct. R. 50(2)(B) and (C). Billewicz's property constitutes a violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1. 15(a)(1), as well 20. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Salomon's failures to safeguard Ms. trust account. with his own property and failed to safeguard client funds in a clearly designated client 19. By placing these funds into his operating account, Mr. Salomon commingled client funds p. 5 Page 5 of5

File Russell F. Hilliard, Esquire Landya B. McCafferty, Disciplinary Counsel Distribution:

September 28,2007

50(2)(B)and (C), and 8.4(a). Craig N. Salomon for violating N.H. Prof. Conduct Rules 1.15( a)(l), Supreme Court Rule For the above reasons, the Professional Conduct Committee issues a Public Censure to

by the Committee in the investigation and prosecution of this matter, as stipulated to by him. The Professional Conduct Committee orders Mr. Salomon to pay the expenses incurred IV. COSTS