This page is an unofficial mirror and is not legal advice. Verify the document against the official source before relying on it.
Christopher M. Tremblay (2007)
following factual findings of the Hearing Panel by clear and convincing evidence:
The Professional Conduct Committee has determined that the record supports the
I. FACTUAL FINDINGS
matter and makes factual findings and rulings oflaw as detailed below.
The Professional Conduct Committee thoroughly reviewed the record in this
Page, and James J. Tenn, Jr.
Alan 1. Cronheim, Richard H. Darling, Gretchen Rule Hamel, James R. Martin, David N.
Vice Chair, Toni M. Gray, Vice Chair, Thomas P. Connair, Reporter, David N. Cole,
Conduct Committee Panel consisted of Margaret H. Nelson, Chair, Benette Pizzimenti,
imposed as a sanction for ethical misconduct as set forth below. The Professional
regarding the above referenced matter and recommended that a one year suspension be
On September 18, 2007, the Professional Conduct Committee had deliberations
RECOMMENDATION FOR A ONE YEAR SUSPENSION
Tremblay, Christopher M advs. Charles A. Cook #06-019
Gerald A. Daley' Holly B. Fazzino, Admin. Coordinator Alan J. Cronheirn * 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'
Professional Conduct Committee New Hampshire Supreme Court Page 2 of 11
represent the aforementioned defendants.
5. Mr. Tremblay filed this motion so that he could appear in the Lawsuit and
Bar.
a statement that he was admitted and"in good standing" with the New Hampshire
Admission"). In paragraph 8 of the Motion for Admission, Mr. Tremblay included
State Counsel to Appear on Their Behalf' (hereinafter referred to as"Motion for
entitled,"Defendants' Motion for Honorable Court's Permission Allowing Out of
4. On or about December 28, 2004, Mr. Tremblay filed a pleading in the Lawsuit
as the"Lawsuit").
Northern States Insurance Agency (docket #2004-01574) (hereinafter referred to
that case included Arthur P. Pearce, III (individually), Driscoll Pearce, Inc. and
County Superior Court on behalf of his client, Robert K. Watson. Defendants in
of Morrison Mahoney, LLP in Boston, Massachusetts filed a lawsuit in Norfolk
3. On or about December 10,2004, Massachusetts attorney, Charles A. Cook, Esq.,
2. Mr. Tremblay is not licensed to practice law in Massachusetts.
03301.
Christopher M. Tremblay, 10 Wildemere Terrace, Concord, New Hampshire
proceeding, Mr. Tremblay has utilized the following address: Law Office of
Tremblay was admitted to practice on October 29, 1999. At times material to this
1. Mr. Tremblay is an attorney licensed to practice law in New Hampshire. Mr. Page 3 of 11
was stilI under the April 24, 2006, Court-ordered suspension.
2006, as an active member of the New Hampshire Bar. However, Mr. Tremblay
1 I. Thereafter, Mr. Tremblay paid his bar dues and was reinstated effective May 2,
admission by permission.
same date, the Norfolk County Superior Court (Lu, J.) rescinded Mr. Tremblay's
informed the Court of Mr. Tremblay's suspension in New Hampshire. On that
10. In a letter to the Norfolk County Superior Court dated April 26,2006, Mr. Cook
suspension was independent of the earlier suspension imposed by the Bar.
his 2005 certificate of compliance with New Hampshire Bar requirements. This
Mr. Tremblay for failure to pay delinquency fees associated with the late filing of
9. In an Order dated April 24, 2006, the New Hampshire Supreme Court suspended
Hampshire Bar.
the Lawsuit. Mr. Tremblay did not advise the Court of his suspension by the New
Tremblay appeared before Judge John T. Lu in Norfolk County Superior Court on
8. On April 12,2006, and while stilI under suspension in New Hampshire, Mr.
Tremblay for non-payment of bar dues.
7. On or about January 13,2006, the New Hampshire Bar Association suspended Mr.
granted Mr. Tremblay's Motion for Admission.
6. On or about May 20, 2005, the Norfolk County Superior Court (Borenstein, J.), Page 4 of 11 The above-listed facts having been found by clear and convincing evidence, the
II. RULINGS OF LAW
Office.
had not responded to any inquiries or correspondence of the Attorney Discipline
17. As ofJuly 26,2007, the date of the convening of the hearing panel, Mr. Tremblay
follow-up letter dated June 23, 2006.
16. The Attorney Discipline Office made further efforts to reach Mr. Tremblay with a
file with the New Hampshire Bar Association.
last known address (10 Wildemere Terrace, Concord, New Hampshire, 03301) on
15. The Attorney Discipline Office mailed the May 3,2006, Letter to Mr. Tremblay's
basis of Mr. Cook's allegations (hereinafter"May 3, 2006, Letter").
that the Attorney Discipline Office had docketed a complaint against him on the
Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office, informed Mr. Tremblay
14. In a letter dated May 3, 2006, James L. DeHart, General Counsel to the New
delinquency fees.
April 24, 2006, suspension as a result of Mr. Tremblay's payment of his
13. In an Order dated May 30, 2006, the New Hampshire Supreme Court lifted the
the Norfolk County Superior Court of his New Hampshire suspension.
alleging professional misconduct for, inter alia, Mr. Tremblay's failure to inform
12. On or about April 26, 2006, Mr. Cook filed a grievance against Mr. Tremblay Page 5 of 11
violation ofN.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.16(a)(1).
from representing his clients after his January 13,2006, suspension constitutes a
20. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Tremblay's failure to withdraw
22 § 46A. See also Constitution N.H. Bar Assn, Article II, § 6.
his continued representation of his clients in that court was a violation ofM.G.L.
withdraw from representing his clients in the Norfolk County Superior Court, and
221 § 46A. Therefore, after his suspension Mr. Tremblay had an obligation to
conditioned on his good standing as a member of the New Hampshire Bar. M.G.L.
19. Mr. Tremblay's right to practice law in the Norfolk County Superior Court was
109 N.H. 260, 263-68 (1968).
Hampshire Bar, 112 N.H. 204 (1972); In re Unification of New Hampshire Bar,
Petition of New Hampshire Bar Assn, 151 N.H. 112 (2004); In re Unified New
Hampshire. See Constitution N.H. Bar Assn, Article II, Section 6; see also In re
Bar on January 13,2006, he was no longer entitled to practice law in New
18. After Mr. Tremblay's license to practice was suspended by the New Hampshire
Termiuatiug Representation:
Massachusetts Rule 1.16(a) and New Hampshire Rule 1.16(a) Decliuiug or
that Christopher M. Tremblay has violated the Rules of Professional Conduct as follows:
Professional Conduct Committee concludes that there is clear and convincing evidence Page 6 of 11
suspension in New Hampshire.
Superior Court on the Lawsuit. Mr. Tremblay did not advise the Court of his
Hampshire, Mr. Tremblay appeared before Judge John T. Lu in Norfolk County
25. On April 12, 2006, and while still under Court-ordered suspension in New
false evidence. Mr. Tremblay did not take any such measures.
now false. He was required to take reasonable remedial measures to correct the
Mr. Tremblay was aware of the fact that he had offered material evidence that was
24. As of the date of his suspension by the New Hampshire Bar (January 13, 2006),
practice law in that Court.
a material fact in the Norfolk County Superior Court's decision to allow him to
See M.G.L., 221 § 46A. Mr. Tremblay's status as a lawyer in good standing was
good standing in New Hampshire was the basis on which that motion was granted.
23. Mr. Tremblay's representation in his Motion for Admission that he was a lawyer in
New Hampshire was no longer true.
his assertion in his Motion for Admission that he was a lawyer in good standing in
22. As of January 13,2006, the date of his Bar suspension, Mr. Tremblay knew that
oflaw in New Hampshire.
the Norfolk County Superior Court that he had been suspended from the practice
21. Between January 13,2006, and May 30, 2006, Mr. Tremblay failed to disclose to
Massachusetts Rule 3.3(a)(4) Candor Toward A Tribunal: Page 7 of 11 law in either New Hampshire or Massachusetts.
32. As of January 13, 2006, Mr. Tremblay had no lawful basis on which to practice
Mr. Tremblay was practicing law in violation ofM.G.L. 221 § 46A.
thereby continuing to practice law in connection with a Massachusetts proceeding,
31. By failing to inform the Norfolk County Superior Court of his change in status and
the New Hampshire Bar.
30. As of January 13,2006, Mr. Tremblay was no longer a lawyer in good standing in
on his good standing as a member of the New Hampshire Bar.
29. Mr. Tremblay was representing his clients in Norfolk County Superior Court based
28. Mr. Tremblay is not and has never been licensed to practice law in Massachusetts.
of Law:
Massachusetts Rule S.S(a) and New Hampshire Rule S.S(a) Unauthorized Practice
3.3(a)(3).
practice oflaw in New Hampshire constitutes a violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct
the Norfolk County Superior Court his January 13, 2006, suspension from the
27. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Tremblay's failure to disclose to
status, that Court terminated his admission by permission.
Norfolk County Superior Court was made aware of Mr. Tremblay's change in
Court learned of Mr. Tremblay's suspension from Mr. Cook. As soon as the
26. Mr. Tremblay did not inform the Court of his suspension at any time. Rather, the Page 8 of 11 Massachusetts Rule and New Hampshire Rule 8.4(c) Misrepresentation:
June 23, 2006, constitutes a violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 8.I(b).
the May 3, 2006, Letter and to the Attorney Discipline Office's correspondence of
39. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Tremblay's failure to respond to
had not responded to either correspondence.
38. As of July 26,2007, the date of the convening of the hearing panel, Mr. Tremblay
reminding him of the complaint and of his obligation to respond.
37. The Attorney Discipline Office also wrote to Mr. Tremblay on June 23,2006,
37 A(II)(a)(5)(C), Mr. Tremblay was required to respond within 30 days.
36. The May 3, 2006, Letter, informed Mr. Tremblay that, pursuant to N.H. Sup. Ct. R.
allegations.
that that it had docketed a complaint against him based upon Mr. Cook's
35. In its May 3, 2006, Letter, the Attorney Discipline Office informed Mr. Tremblay
New Hampshire Rule 8.l(b) Failure to Cooperate:
violation ofN.H. R. Prof. Conduct 5.5(a).
representation of his clients between January 13 and May 30, 2006, constitutes a
34. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Tremblay's continued
unauthorized practice of law in Massachusetts.
33. From January 13,2006 through May 30, 2006, Mr. Tremblay was engaged in the Page 90f11 III. DISCUSSION
violation of Rule 8.4(a).
aforementioned Rules, there is necessarily clear and convincing evidence of a
46. Because there exists clear and convincing evidence of violation of the
Massachusetts Rule and New Hampshire Rule 8.4(a) Misconduct:
constitutes a violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(c).
45. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Tremblay's conduct in this regard
misrepresentation before that Court.
Superior Court of his change in status constitutes a continuing act of deceit and
44. Mr. Tremblay's failure after January 13,2006, to inform the Norfolk County
law under false pretenses.
and thereby continuing to practice law in that Court, Mr. Tremblay was practicing
43. By failing to inform the Norfolk County Superior Court of his change in status,
the New Hampshire Bar.
42. As of January 13,2006, Mr. Tremblay was no longer a lawyer in good standing in
on his good standing as a member ofthe New Hampshire Bar.
41. Mr. Tremblay was representing his clients in Norfolk County Superior Court based
40. Mr. Tremblay is not and has never been licensed to practice law in Massachusetts. Page 10 of 11 For all of the above reasons, the Professional Conduct Committee recommends a
V. CONCLUSION
adopted these Standards, the Court has"considered them when imposing sanctions").
Case, 149 N.H. 132, 139 (2003) (noting that, although the Court has never formally
Responsibility, Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (1991). See,~, Shillen's
28 (2002). This sanction is also in accord with the ABA Center for Professional
ofattomey discipline as described by The N.H. S. Ct See,~, Feld's Case, 149 NH 19,
one year suspension from the practice oflaw. This sanction is in accord with the purposes
Committee, by majority vote, concludes that the appropriate discipline in this matter is a
Having made the aforementioned findings and rulings, the Professional Conduct
IV. SANCTION
Bar dues, which he promptly cured.
a prior record of conduct that warranted disciplinary sanctions other than nonpayment of
disciplinary process would justify the sanction of disbarment. Mr. Tremblay did not have
panel's conclusion below that neither his conduct nor his lack of respect for the
Tremblay's conduct presented clear ethical violations, the panel agreed with the hearing
mitigating or aggravating circumstances in the record to be considered. Although Mr.
was lengthy debate regarding the appropriate sanction to be imposed. There were no
Following a careful review of the record by the PCC panel members sitting, there Page 11 of 11
File Landya B. McCafferty, Disciplinary Counsel Christopher M. Tremblay, Esquire Distribution:
November 13,2007
Professional Conduct Committee for the investigation and prosecution of this matter.
thereof; and also recommends an assessment of the expenses and costs incurred by the
5.5(a), 8.1(b), 8.4(c) and 8.4(a), and directs Disciplinary Counsel to seek the imposition
Tremblay, Esq. for violating N.H. Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.16(a), 3.3(a)(4),
sanction of a One Year Suspension from the practice oflaw for Christopher M.