Jo-Ellen Wells (2006)

Attorney Wells failed to advise a client of the fee structure, and time after commencing the representation. The PCC alleged that the rate of the lawyer's fee to the client before or within a reasonable (4) Rule 1.5(b). This rule requires a lawyer to communicate the basis or divorce matter.. been dismissed and that a final hearlng had been scheduled in a clients of the status of their cases, including the fact that one case had phone calls to clients, failed to explain a fee agreement, failed to advise PCC alleged that Attorney Wells failed on numerous occasions to return client to make informed decisions regarding the representation. The of a matter and the alternative courses of action available to permit the requests for information, and to explain the legal and practical aspects informed regarding the status of a matter, to comply with reasonable (3) Rule 1.4. This rule requires a lawyer to keep a client reasonably divorce matters. had been dismissed and failing to file the necessary paperwork in two rule by failing to file necessary paperwork to reinstate a civil suit that representing a client. The pce alleged that Attorney Wells violated this (2) Rule 1.3(a). This rule requires a lawyer to act with diligence in defect. corrective action when the civil case was dismissed as a result of this this rule by failing to endorse a writ in a civil case and failing to take representation to a client. The PCC alleged that Attorney Wells violated (1) Rules 1.1. This ru1e requires a lawyer to provide competent

alleged violations of the following Rules of Professional Conduct: admitted and no further hearing shall be required." In this case, the petition petition filed by the PCC, the allegations of the petition"shall be deemed to be Rule 37(16)(c) provides that if a respondent attorney fails to answer a

. petition within 30 days of service. No answer to the petition has been filed. The order providing for service required Attorney Wells to file an answer to the petition and 9rder were left at the abode of Attorney Wells on January 23, 2006. unclaimed. The court then issued an order fOr in person or abode service. The Wells by certified mail. The petition and order were returned to the court the court issued an order requiring that the petition be served upon Attorney petition requesting that Attorney Jo-Ellen Wells be disbarred. Shortly thereafter, On October 14,':;iOOS, the Professional Conduct Committee CPCC) filed a

LD-2005-0007, In the Matter oLIo-Ellen Wens

DATE: March 29, 2006

Broderick, C.J., and Dalianis, Duggan, Galway and Hicks, JJ., concurred.

Office of the Attorney General for such action as it deems appropriate. A copy of the petition fof disbarment and of this order shall be sent to the

this matter. by the Professional Conduct Committee in the investigation and prosecution of issuance of the court's order. She is also hereby assessed all expenses incurred authority of any other jurisdictions in which she is licensed to practice law of the Hampshire, effective immediately. She is ordered to notify the attorney discipline THEREFORE, Jo-Ellen Wells is disbarred from the practice of law in New I this case is disbarment. the court in this proceeding, the court concludes that the appropriate sanction in repetitive nature of her misconduct, and her failure to cooperate with the PCC or admitted. After considering the number of Attorney Wells' violations, the In accordance with Rule 37(16)(c), the committee's allegations are deemed

a client that she had a scheduling conflict. PCC alleged that Attorney Wells violated this rule by misrepresenting to conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. The (S) Rule S.4(c). This rule makes it professional misconduct to engage in Rules of Professional Conduct. (7) Rule S.4(a). This rule makes it professional misconduct to violate the she withdrew shortly before the hearing. failed to file a motion to continue a hearing that was scheduled when actions that were necessary with respect to a pending hearing, and that Attorney Wells violated this rule by failing to advise a client of the client's interests upon termination of representation. The PCC alleged (6) Rule 1.16(d). This rule requires a lawyer to take steps to protect a their requests that the funds be .returned. this rule when she failed to return unused retainers to clients despite regarding such property. The PCC alleged that Attorney Wells violated funds of clients and third parties and to maintain financial records (5) Rule 1.15(b). This rule requires a lawyer to safeguard the property and rate. particularly whether the client would be charged a flat fee or an hourly p. 3 FLe ·1 i'- Irene Dalbec, Supreme Court

Debbie Bills, Supreme Court NH Bar Association Attorney General Jo-Ellen Wells, Esquire Landya B. McCafferty, Esquire Distribution: