Thomas M. Walsh (2006)

findings an.d rulings as detailed below:

2006, hearing before the Hearing Panel, the Professional Conduct Committee ma.kes factual

plan to participate in the proceedings before the Hearing Panel, and Transcript of the July 28,

correspondence including a letter from Mr. Walsh dated July 28,2006, indicating that he did not

Memorandum on Sanction: Disbarment, Disciplinary Counsel's discovery file, various

Proposed Findings of Fact and Rulings of Law and Request for Costs, Disciplinary Counsel's

Having reviewed the Record, including the Notice of Charges, Disciplinary Counsel's

were absent.

Darling, Reporter, Gretchen Rule Hamel and James R. Martin. Toni M. Gray and David N. Page

L. Arnold, David N. Cole, Thomas P. Connair, Alan J. Cronheim, Gerald A. Daley, Richard H.

referenced matter. Members present were Margaret H. Nelson, Chair, Benette Pizzimenti, Ellen

On October 17,2006, the Professional Conduct COIT.l.l'11ittee deliberated the above-

Walsh, Thomas M advs. Attorney Discipline Office # 05-107

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. Darlirtg* Margaret H. Nelson, Chair 4 Park Street, Suite 304 Gerald A. Daley*

'. p. 2 Page 2 of9 in the amount of $30,000.00 from Mr. Mark N. Plantier. The $30,000.00 loan was evidenced by a

Vincent J. Nardi. On January 30, 2004, Mr. Walsh, acting pursuant to the POA, obtained a loan

The signature of Mr. Dururnan on the POA was purportedly witnessed and notarized by Mr.

conveyance, refinance or mortgage activity. required to consummate such purchase, transfer, all other documents which as the case may be, may be right to execute mortgages, promissory notes, affidavits and 3. Without limiting the same, my said Attorney shall have the

140 Chase \1.1ay, }v1anchester, }Je\v Hfu."'11pshire. said Attorney may deem proper, the rea.! estate known as acquire, upon such terms and for such consideration, as my 2. To mortgage, purchase, lease, negotiate, or otherwise

Duruman's signature, appoints Mr. Walsh to conduct Mr. Dururnan's affairs, including:

A Power of Attorney ("POA") dated January 14, 2004, which appears to contain Mr.

relationship. Mr. Walsh had represented Mr. Dururnan on several real estate matters.

Prior to the events described behw, Mr. vValsh and :Mr. Duru... '11anhad all attorney-client

owns a condominium in Manchester, New Hampshire, but also maintains an address in Istanbul.

:Mr. Bilger DunL.'11an is a dual citizen of Turkey and the United States. ~.1r. Dururnan

above a..Dd received on the mOl11..ing of the hearing was or purported to be from Lhis address.

Street, Manchester, New Hampshire, 03104. The communication from Mr. Walsh described

1987. At all times material to this proceeding, Mr. Walsh operated his law office at 870 Hall

Mr. vValsh is licensed to practice law in New Hampshire, and was admitted to practice in

convincing evidence:

Panel Report, determined that the record supports the following findings of fact by clear and

The Professional Conduct Connnittee, upon consideration and review of the Hearing

FACTUAL FINDINGS p. 3 Page 3 of9

mortgage and it is not your morigage. This is to verifY that you do not owe anything on this

"Bilger

Mr. Duruman:

Walsh about this matter. In a handwritten note dated September 12,2005, Mr. Walsh wrote to

documents on his behalf. After receiving the foreclosure notice, Mr. Duruman contacted Mr.

Mr. Duruman did not sign the POA, and did not grant Mr. Walsh the authority to sign

loan, and until the foreclosure notice, was unaWaIe of its existence.

$55,000.00 loan and mortgage. Mr. Duruman received no disbursements from the $55,000.00

foreclosure notice. This was the first time Mr. Duruman learned of the existence of the

In September, 2005, the loan went i..'1to default, and :Mr. Plantier sent ~Y1r. Dmuman a

Mr. Walsh acting pursuant to the POA.

the POA. As of April 12,2004,:Mr. Plantier had loaned Mr. DlL.'l1man atotal of $55,000.00, with

a1J.d l-Aortgage Modification Agreement" in reliance upon Mr. Walsh's purported authority under

Mr. Duruman's"power of attorney" and pursuant to thePOA. Mr. Plantier entered into the"Note

the loaTl by $25,000.00. Mr. Walsh signed the"Note and Mortgage Modification Agreement" as

Mortgage Modification Agreement" dated April 12, 2004, Mr. Walsh and Mr. Plantier increased

Walsh the authority to sign the note and mortgage on Mr. Duruman's behalf. In a"Note and

making the loan to Mr. Duruman, Mr. Plantier relied upon the POA that purportedly gave Mr.

signed the note and mortgage pursuant to the POA as Mr. Duruman's"power ofattomey." In

note and secured by a mortgage on Mr. Duruman's condominium in Manchester. Mr. Walsh p. 4 Page 4 of9

Disciplinary Counsel on the day of the hearing, Mr. Walsh has not responded to the December

the December 12,2005, complaint. With the exception of the communication received by

R. Prof. Conduct 8.1 (b). The Attorney Discipline Office included in that letter another copy of

December 12,2005, complaint would result in a charge of failure to cooperate pursuant to N.H.

Attorney Discipline Office informed Mr. Walsh in that letter that his failure to respond to the

Mr. Walsh that he must give the matter his"immediate attention." (Emphasis in original.) The

again in a letter dated January 17,2006. In that letter, the Attorney Discipline Office informed

days. The Attorney Discipline Office received no response from Mr. Walsh and wrote to him

pursuant to N.H. Sup. Ct. R. 37 A(2)(a)(5)(C), Mr. Walsh was required to respond within 30

"December 12,2005, complaint"). The December 12, 2005, complaint informed Mr. Walsh that,

that it had docketed a complaint against him based upon the foregoing events (hereinafter

In a letter dated December 12,2005, the Attorney Discipline Office informed Mr.'Walsh

Mr. Plantier anything. Your friend & atty. Please tell your wife I will clear everything. You do not owe me or from Mr. Plantier or me. I apologize for the misunderstanding. This will verify that you did not receive any money $55,000

Allen. to Mark Plantier. I will clear this through Mark Plantier and John removed and has nothing to do with you. You do not owe anything Sorry about the mortgage of$55,000.00. It is being

Duruman:"Dear Bilger:

In a handwritten note dated the following day, September 13, 2005, Mr. Walsh wrote to Mr. p. 5 Page 5 of9

to respond to a lawful demand for information from the ADO.

Walsh was aware of the proceedings and appears to have deliberately neglected his duty

Discipline Office. Indeed, as the letter received on the day of the hearing evidences, Mr.

4. Mr.'Walsh never responded to the December 12,2005, complaint from the Attorney

disciplinary authority.

3. The December 12,2005, complaint was a lawful demand for information from a

R. 37A(2)(a)(5)(C), Mr. Walsh was required to respond within 30 days.

2. The December 12, 2005, complaint informed Mr. Walsh that, pursuant to N.H. Sup. Ct.

the foregoing events.

December 12, 2005, complaint that it had docketed a complaint against him based upon

1. As described in detail above, the Attorney Discipline Office informed Mr. Walsh in the

evidence:

Report, determined that the record supports the following rulings of law by clear and convincing

The Professional Conduct Committee, upon consideration and review of the Hearing Panel

announced his plan to seek to resign from the New Hampshire Bar Association.

Counsel that he did not plan to participate in the proceedings before the Hearing Panel, and

12,2005, complaint. Mr. Walsh submitted a letter on July 28,2006, informing Disciplinary p. 6 Page 6 of9

truthfulness or fitness as a lawyer in violation ofN.H. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(b).

the crime of forgery, RSA 638:1, a crime that reflects adversely on Mr. Walsh's honesty,

11. The Panel believes that Mr. Walsh's conduct constitutes clear and convincing evidence of

validity of the POA.

amount of$55,000 from Mr. Plantier knowing that Mr. Plantier was relying on the

Mr. Plantier would rely upon it, and thereafter received and accepted money in the

Plantier as genuine, knowing that it had not been executed by his client, intending that

evidence in the Panel's judgment, that Mr. Walsh purposely presented the POA to Mr.

10. The conduct set forth in the admitted facts demonstrates, by clear and convincing

with Mr. Walsh.

9. :Mr. PIa..'1tier relied upon the validity of the POil~ to enter into the 1\'10 10a.11 agreements

Duruman, pursuant to the POA.

8. Mr. Plantier believed that Mr.'NaIsh had 1\1r. Duru...'11an's authority to act on behalf ofMr.

7. Mr. Walsh utilized this POA to COnS1L1Tl.JTIate the two loans with Mr. Pla..ntieI.

knowledge or consent.

Mr. Du..ruman's name to thePOA on or about Janua.ry 14,2004, without MI. Duruman's

6. As described in detail in the Panel's recitation of the admitted facts, Mr. Walsh sign~d

Conduct 8.1 (b).

complaint constitutes clear and convincing evidence of a violation of N.H. R. Prof.

5. The Panel believes that Mr. Walsh's failure to respond to the December 12,2005, p. 7 Page 7 of9

("Standards;'), which our Supreme Court has looked to for guidance, support the conclusion that

Hampshire and the American Bar Association's Standards For Imposing Sanctions (1992)

"the sanction must take into account the severity of the misconduct." Both case law in New

As the New Hampshire Supreme Court noted in Coffey's Case, 152 N.H.503, 513 (2005),

necessarily clear and convincing evidence of a violation of Rule 8.4( a).

convincing evidence of violation of the aforementioned Rules, there is likewise

18. The Panel also concludes that, in view of its conclusion that there exists clear and

a violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(c).

17. The Panel believes that Mr. Walsh's conduct constitute clear a..1J.d convincing evidence of

constituting acts of dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.

16. In doing the above described acts, M..r. ·Walsh engaged in conduct involving or

Duruman pursuant to the POA.

15. Mr. Plantier believed that Mr. ·Walsh had Mr. Duruman's consent to act on behalf of Mr.

14. Mr. Plantier relied upon the POA to enter into the two loan agreements vvith Mr. ·Walsh.

Plantier, Mr. Walsh intended to defraud Mr. Plantier.

13. At the time that Mr. Walsh utilized the POA to consummate the two loans with Mr.

Mr. Duruman's knowledge or consent.

12. As described in detail above, Mr.'Nalsh signed Mr. Duruman's name to the POA without

that he did not plan to participate in this proceeding. His lack of cooperation in this process is

to be admitted." Attorney Walsh has, in fact, expressly advised the Attorney Discipline Office

Sup Ct. R 37 A(III)(H)(3)(A),"the allegations set forth in the Notice of Charges shall be deemed

Discipline Office has not received an Answer to the Notice of Charges. Therefore, under N.H.

Notice of Charges by Hillsborough County Sheriffs Deputy Molloy. To date, the Attorney

through the United States mail, on April 28, 2006, the respondent was served"In Hand" with a

sent to him by the Attorney Discipline Office. After numerous attempts to serve Mr. Walsh

brought against him, nor did he answer, either in person or in writing, any of the communications

An aggravating factor in this case is that Mr. Walsh never responded to this complaint

§9.22(d).

New Hampshire Bar is Substa..lltial. M...r. Walsh also committed multiple offenses: Sta..lldarc1s

§9 .22(b). The actual injury to Mr. Duruman was significant and the injury to the integrity of the

and selfish motive in forging Mr. DUruma..ll'S na..rne to the fmancial documents: ~t>1nc1ards

Mr. ·Walsh's acts of deceit were both knowing and intentional. Mr. Walsh acted with a dishonest

an applicable guideline for Mr. Walsh's misconduct. The evidence is clear and convincing that

Section 5.11 (a)-(b) of the Standards entitled"Failure to maintain personal integrity," is

in the future." Coffev's Case, 152 N.H; 503,513 (2005) (internal quotation marks omitted).

confidence in the bar, preserve the integrity of the legal profession, and prevent similar conduct

The purpose of the Court's disciplinary power"is to protect the public, maintain public

and misrepresentation, and criminal conduct reflecting adversely on his fitness to practice law.

Mr. Walsh should be disbarred from the practice of law, for conduct involving intentional fraud p. 9 Page 9 of9

File Thomas M. Walsh, Esquire Landya B. McCafferty, Disciplinary Counsel Distribution:

October 25, 2006

paragraph.

appeal to the New Hampshire Supreme Court. See also Supreme Court Rule 37(3)(c), last

Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 37(A)(III)(d)(2)(D)(4)(A), Mr. Walsh has the right to

all costs associated with the investigation and prosecution of this matter.

Attorney General's Office. The Professional Conduct COlJ1...mittee also orders Mr. Walsh to pay

concerns. The Committee also directs the Attorney Discipline Office to make a referral to the

forth above, and the immediate interim suspension of Thomas M. Walsh due to public safety

Attorney Discipline Office to file a Petition seeking disbarment, based on the Rules violations set

For all of the above reasons, the Professional Conduct Committee hereby directs the

Committee's consideration: Standards §9.32(a).

plainly an aggravating factor. No mitigating factors were presented for the Hearing Panel or the