Marc L. Van De Water (2007)

explained to Mr. Withey that his case would be addressed"shortly." obtain a status update on his case. During these status updates, Mr. Van De Water 4. Approximately every 4-6 weeks thereafter, Mr. Withey contacted Mr. Van De Water to

Water all of the information he had about the accident. Withey signed a fee agreement, filled out medical release forms and gave Mr. VanDe 3. In July 2004, Mr. Withey hired Mr. VanDe Water to represent him. At that time, Mr.

automobile accident caused by a drunk driver in Lawrence, Massachusetts. 2. In June 2004, Richard A. Withey, the Complainant in this matter, was involved in an

Road, Bow, New Hampshire, 03304. Van De Water operated his law office as Van De Water Law Offices, P.L.L.C., 44 Albin De Water was admitted to practice in 1988. At all times material to this proceeding, Mr. 1. Mr. Van De Water is an attorney licensed to practice law in New Hampshire. Mr. Van

as follows: The Committee found, by clear and convincing evidence, the facts as agreed to in the Stipulation

Process. The Committee granted Disciplinary Counsel's Motion to Permit Waiver of Hearings Committee

Oral Argument was not requested. by telephone. Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair; James R. Martin, and David N. Page were absent. Darling, Gerald A. Daley, Thomas P. Connair. Ellen L. Arnold and David N. Cole participated Members present included: Margaret H. Nelson, Chair, Toni Gray, Vice Chair, Richard H On July 17, 2007, the Professional Conduct Committee deliberated the above-captioned matter.

Van De Water, Marc L. advs. Richard A. Withey # 06-015

Alan J. Cronheim Holly.B. Fazzino, Admin. Coordinator Thomas P. Connair * non attorney member David N. Cole David N. Page* Ellen L. 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 Chenell Drive, Suite 102 Gerald A. Daley*

p. 2 are not interested in could you please just let me know and possibly than you, but if this is something you either do not have time for or There is nobody I would rather have represent me more

company. we have even had a phone conversation with the insurance because the originals were too old and now I can't even find out if back a few months ago I came in and signed release forms again more. Around May you told me you would"dust off the file" and Back in March you said it would be about 4 to six weeks

like to move forward. accident, and I realize I'm not paralyzed or disfigured but I would grateful. It has been over a year since I came to you with my great job helping me protect my children and I will always be torpedo her that you were not the person for the job. You did a impressed me by telling me up front that if! was looking to The first time I needed you for help with my ex-wife you

important to me. more important with larger clients than I am, however this case is realize that you are very busy and most likely with cases that are have left five messages and have not heard back from you. I I have been trying to reach you for the past three weeks. I

Mark,

email communication: As a result, on December 1, 2005, Mr. Withey sent Mr. Van De Water the following 8. In November 2005, Mr. Withey had difficulty reaching Mr. Van De Water by telephone.

Mr. Withey sign new medical release forms. Mr. Withey signed the new forms. 7. In July 2005, Mr. Withey telephoned again. This time, Mr. Van De Water requested that

that he would"dust offthe file." 6. In a conversation in April 2005, Mr. Van De Water apologized to Mr. Withey and stated

would be handled in approximately"4-6 weeks." 5. During a status update in March 2005, Mr. Van De Water told Mr. Withey that his case p. 3 Thanks, Rick Withey Please let me know,

up with their nonsense for long. to file a lawsuit immediately because I have no intention of putting If the insurance company is dragging their feet then I want

where do they stand on closing the case? 4) If we have had contact with the insurance company 3) What is the status of my medical records being sent out? company? 2) Has there been any correspondence with the insurance when? 1) Who have you spoken to at the insurance company and

reply. Please update me on the following: case. I sent an e-mail over a week ago and have not received a It has been six weeks since we last communicated about my

Marc,

wrote the following in an email to Mr. Van De Water: 10. Having not heard anything from Mr. Van De Water, on January 16, 2006, Mr. Withey

Marc

Thanks for your patience.

is best way to raise me. work in Bow, so we switched to Nextel). As always, that or e-mail Please make a note of my new cell 556-2277 (Verizon doesn't

your matter on Tuesday. to helping you to resolve the matter, and I will be able to check into from my work schedule and I am just digging out. I look forward appointments and plastic surgery. This has erased the past month the 2 floor ceiling ofthe bam, requiring a whole lot of doctor nd office to Bow I shattered my nose taking a 50 lb ladder swing from Sorry for the troubles getting a hold of me. While moving the

Dear Rick

9. In an email datedDecember5.2005.Mr. Van De Water replied: p. 4 Barbagallo requested that Mr. Van De Water release Mr. Withey's file to him. 22. In two separate letters, one dated January 26 and the other dated February 16, 2006, Mr.

21. Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference.

relationship. diligence on Mr. Withey's behalf caused avoidable harm to their lawyer-client time-frame constitutes a lack of diligence. Mr. VanDe Water's failure to act with 20. Mr. Van De Water's failure to take any legal action on Mr. Withey's behalf during this

Withey, Mr. Van De Water took no action on Mr. Withey's behalf. 19. From July 2004 through January 2006, while Mr. Van De Water was representing Mr.

18. Allegations set forth above are incorporated by reference.

evidence, the violations of disciplinary rules as agreed to in the Stipulations, as follows: The above facts having been established, the Committee found, by clear and convincing

answered Mr. Withey's complaint. 17. In a letter to the Attorney Discipline Office dated May 4, 2006, Mr. Van De Water

Withey ultimately decided not to pursue his case against the drunk driver. 16. On or about May 4,2006, Mr. Van De Water forwarded the file to Mr. Barbagallo. Mr.

complaining about Mr. Van De Water's failures to communicate. 15. On March 13,2006, Mr. Withey sent a letter to the Attorney Discipline Office

responded to these letters. 14. As of March 13,2006, Mr. Van De Water had not forwarded the file or otherwise

16, 2006, to Mr. Van De Water to release Mr. Withey's file. 13. Mr. Barbagallo sent two written requests, one on January 26 and the other on February

Office in Salem, New Hampshire to represent him. 12. On January 24,2006, Mr. Withey retained Ralph A. Barbagallo, Jr., of Barbagallo Law

11. Mr. Withey received no response to his January 16, 2006, email from Mr. Van De Water. p. 5 File Marc L. Van De Water, Esquire Landya B. McCafferty, Disciplinary Counsel Distribution:

L. Van De Water for the violations of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.3(a), 1. 16(d) and 8.4(a). Based on the above, the Professional Conduct Committee issues this Reprimand to Marc

Committee in the investigation and prosecution of this matter. Mr. Van De Water shall pay the expenses incurred by the Professional Conduct

expressed remorse, and has no prior disciplinary record. mitigating factors: Mr. VanDe Water admitted his misconduct; accepted responsibility, as a failure to promptly return the client's file. The Committee considered the following Mr. Van De Water's misconduct involved a failure to act diligently for his client as well

consistent the American Bar Association's Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions (1992). serves the purposes of attorney discipline, see Coffey's Case, 152 N.H. 503, 513 (2005), and is The Committee hereby issues a Reprimand, as stipulated by the parties. A Reprimand

Prof. Conduct 8.4(a). above rules, there is necessarily clear and convincing evidence of a violation of N.H. R. 26. Because there exists clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Van De Water violated the

constitutes a violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.16( d). 25. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Van De Water's conduct in this regard

following Mr. Barbagallo's January 26th letter. 24. Mr. Van De Water knowingly failed to return Mr. Withey's file in a timely manner

filed his March 13,2006, professional conduct complaint against Mr. Van De Water. 23. Mr. Van De Water did not respond to those letters until May 4,2006, after Mr. Withey