Thomas P. Grodt (2012)

oflaw in New Hampshire, effective December 6, 2010. 2. Mr. Grodt is cUlTently subject to a three-year suspension from the practice

on May 27,1997. He is also admitted to practice law in Massachusetts. 1. Thomas P. Grodt was admitted to the practice oflaw in New Hampshire

convincing evidence. The Committee accepts the Stipulation. This establishes the following facts by clear and

"Stipulation"), the Committee makes the following factual findings and rulings. Approve Stipulation and Stay Disciplinary Proceedings Relative to the Issue of Sanction (the Process. Upon further deliberation, including consideration of the Assented-to Motion to The Committee voted to grant the Request to Permit Waiver of the Hearings Committee Connair, and James R. Martin were absent. H. Nelson, Chair, Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair, Toni M. Gray, Vice Chair, Thomas P. N. Cole, Gerald A. Daley, Richard H. Darling, Jaye 1. Rancourt, and Richard D. Sager. Margaret Chair of the meeting by Margaret H. Nelson who was unable to attend, Susan R. Chollet, David deliberated the above captioned matter. Members present included Alan J. Cronheim, designated On February 21, 2012, the Professional Conduct Committee (the"Committee")

Grodt, Thomas P. advs. RichardA. Newcomb #11-050

Alan J. Cronheim Holly B. Fazzino, Administrator Thomas P. Connair, non attorney member David N. Cole Richard D. Sager Susan R. Chollet' Jaye L. Rancourt Toni M. Gray,' Vice Chair 603-224-5828. Fax 228-951 I James R. Martin Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Richard H. Darling' Margaret H. Nelson, Chair 4 Chenell Drive, Suite 102 Gerald A. Daley'

filed. Newcomb needed to produce in order for the petition to be completed and Newcomb that there was any additional information or documents that Mr. 12. Mr. Grodt never filed anything for Mr. Newcomb, nor did he tell Mr.

about the status of the bankruptcy filing. were no instructions for Mr. Newcomb nor was there any information Newcomb that his indebtedness was approximately $27,000.00. There enclosing a coupon for a credit counseling service, and informing Mr. 11. On October 29,2010, Mr. Grodt finally sent a letter to Mr. Newcomb

Newcomb began having difficulty reaching Mr. Grodt. 10. In 01' about July 2009, after the retainer payment was made in full, Mr.

Newcomb in a client trust account. 9. There is no indication that Mr. Grodt placed funds received from Mr.

6127109: $50.00 6119/09: $150.00 511/09: $200.00 1013/08: $250.00 7/3/08: $150.00 Undated: $200.00

8. Over the next year, the following payments were made by Mr. Newcomb:

Mr. Grodt towards a $1,000.00 retainer for legal services. 7. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Newcomb began making installment payments to

Mr. Grodt in his office. 6. The letter also instructed Mr. Newcomb to call and arrange a time to meet

and a list of changes in bankruptcy laws as of 2005. bankruptcy filing, a comparison of Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy, information about what documentation was needed for a Chapter 7 5. Later that day, Mr. Grodt sent a cover letter to Mr. Newcomb and included

legal representation in a bankruptcy matter. 4. On April 10, 2008, Richard A. Newcomb contacted Mr. Grodt requesting

Peabody Road Annex, Derry, New Hampshire 03038. 3. At all times relevant to this case, Mr. Grodt operated his law practice at 4 p. 3 Page 3 of7 records, including Mr. Newcomb's client file. should not be held in contempt for his failure to produce numerous requesting the Supreme Court to order Mr. Grodt to show cause why he 25. Attorney Mahoney pursued production of the file by Mr. Grodt, ultimately

had paid a full retainer to Mr. Grodt for the filing of a bankruptcy petition. 24. Mr. Newcomb provided receipts to Attorney Mahoney, alleging that he

23. Attorney Mahoney did not have Mr. Newcomb's file at that time.

to the status of his case. 22. Mr. Newcomb contacted Attorney Mahoney and requested information as

Mahoney had been appointed to take inventory of Mr. Grodt's files. his complaint, the ADO informed Mr. Newcomb that Attorney Marilyn 21. In speaking with Mr. Newcomb during the ADO's initial investigation of

20. No reply to the complaint was ever filed by Mr. Grodt.

due on July 7,2011. follow-up correspondence reminding Mr. Grodt that his reply had been 19. No reply was forthcoming and on July 15, 2011, Mr. Trevethick sent

pursuant to S. Ct. Rule 37 A(ii)(a)(5)(C). forwarded a copy of the complaint to Mr. Grodt requesting a reply 18. On June 7, 2011, Acting General Counsel Thomas V. Trevethick

17. Mr. Newcomb filed a grievance dated May 27, 2011, with the ADO.

not. Mr. Grodt said he would call Mr. Newcomb back the next day, but he did 16. In early May 2011, Mr. Newcomb was able to reach Mr. Grodt by phone.

2010. secure Mr. Grodt's compliance with the Court's order of December 16, Supreme Court between FeblUary 2011 and August 2011, attempting to 15. The Attorney Discipline Office ("ADO") filed numerous motions with the

and trust and operating accounts. Attorney Marilyn Mahoney to take possession of Mr. Grodt's client files 14. On December 16, 2010, the New Hampshire Supreme Court appointed

on an interim basis, effective immediately. 13. On December 6, 2010, Mr. Grodt was suspended from the practice oflaw p. 4 Page 4 of7

means by which the client's objectives are to be accomplished and keep the 33. Rule 1.4 requires a lawyer to reasonably consult with the client about the

and convincing evidence of a violation of Rule 1.3. the manner agreed and within a reasonable period of time represents clear 32. MI'. Grodt's failure to carry out his representation of Richard Newcomb in

31. Similarly, Mr. Grodt never infOlmed the client of any cause for delay.

number of Mr. Newcomb's financial records. do so, accepting a full retainer for legal fees, and taking possession of a bankruptcy petition on behalf of Mr. Newcomb despite having agreed to 30. Between June 2009 and December 2010, Mr. Grodt failed to file a

promptness in representing a client." N.H. R. Prof. Conduct Rule 1.3. 29. Rule 1.3 requires a lawyer to"act with reasonable diligence and

evidence that the Respondent violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct. The Committee accepts the Stipulation and accordingly finds clear and convincing

Stipulation ~~ 1-28 at 1-4.

were deposited, or their disposition. had no financial records to confirm where Mr. Newcomb's retainer funds other paperwork relating to Mr. Newcomb's case. However, Mr. Grodt Attorney Mahoney found Mr. Grodt's copies of receipts, money orders and 28. When Mr. Grodt produced Mr. Newcomb's file on September 29, 2011,

Mahoney. ordered Mr. Grodt to produce files and financial records for Attorney 27. On September 21,2011, the Court found Mr. Grodt in contempt and again

that he could retain new counsel. Supreme Court to disburse $1,000.00 of those funds to Mr. Newcomb so his client trust account, Attorney Mahoney obtained permission from the 26. After having determined that Mr. Grodt was holding unidentified funds in p. 5 Page 5 of7

accordance with the provisions of the New Hampshire Supreme Court them in a clearly designated trust account, with accompanying records in 39. Mr. Grodt's failure to safeguard Mr. Newcomb's retainer funds by placing

retainer he gave to Mr. Grod!. Grodt's account in order to reimburse Mr. Newcomb for the loss of the the Supreme COUlt to release otherwise unidentified funds from Mr. Newcomb's funds resulted in Attorney Mahoney having to seek leave of 38. Mr. Grodt's failure to maintain a client trust account specific to Mr.

funds into a clearly designated client trust account 37. There is no indication that Mr. Grodt ever deposited Mr. Newcomb's

institutions. N.H. Sup. Ct. R. 50(2)(B). (separate from the attorney's own funds) in financial deposited in one or more clearly designated trust accounts All cash property of clients received by attorneys shall be

36. N.H. Sup. Ct. R. 50(2)(B) states:

any portion thereof .... N.H. R. Prof. Conduct U5. after final distribution of such funds or other property or distribution and shall be preserved for a period of six years possession from the time of receipt to the time of final other property of the client at any time in the lawyer's handling, maintenance and disposition of all funds and (b) Records shall be maintained by the lawyer of the provisions of the New Hampshire Supreme Court Rules .... clearly designated trust accounts in accordance with the (a) ... (Client) funds shall be deposited in one or more

35. N.H. R. Prof. Conduct Rule U5 states:

Rule 1.15(a) and 1.15(b) and Supreme Court Rule 50(2)(B):

evidence ofa violation of Rule 1.4. infOlmed about the status of his case represents clear and convincing 34. Mr. Grodt's failure to take reasonable steps to keep Mr. Newcomb

Conduct 1.4(a)(2). client reasonably infonned about the status of the matter. N.H. R. Prof. p. 6 Page 6 of7

to do so. required him to respond to the docketed complaint, and gave him 20 days 46. This letter infonned Mr. Grodt that N.H. Sup. Ct. R. 37A(II)(a)(5)(C),

grievance. ADO had docketed a complaint against him based upon Mr. Newcomb's 45. In his June 7, 2011, letter, Mr. Trevethick infonned Mr. Grodt that the

respond to a lawful demand for infonnation from a disciplinary authority. 44. N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 8.1(b) prohibits a lawyer from knowingly failing to

clear and convincing evidence of a violation of Rule 1.16. financial documents and retainer funds that had not been earned represents about his abandonment of the case, and his failure to return promptly Newcomb's interests, his failure to give reasonable notice to the client 43. Mr. Grodt's failure to take reasonably practicable steps to protect Mr.

retainer funds. records delayed the return of Mr. Newcomb's financial documents and failure to turn over to AttOlney Mahoney all of his client files and banking ordered her to notify Mr. Grodt's clients of his suspension, Mr. Grodt's possession of Mr. Grodt's files and operating and trust accounts, and 42. Although the Supreme Court appointed Attorney Mahoney to take

ADO. resulted in the filing of a grievance about Mr. Grodt's misconduct with the communication, amounted to abandonment of the bankruptcy case and 41. Mr: Grodt's lack of attention to Mr. Newcomb's case, including his lack of

Prof. Conduct 1.16( d). payment of fee or expense that has not been earned or incurred." N.H. R. and property to which the client is entitled and refunding any advance client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, surrendering papers protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable notice of (sic) the representation"... shall take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to 40. Rule 1.16 states that a lawyer, as a condition oftennination of

Rule 1.16(d): Declining or Terminating Representation

Prof. Conduct Rule 1.15, and N.H. Sup. Ct. R. 50(2)(B). Rules represents clear and convincing evidence of a violation ofN .H. R. p. 7 Page 7 of7

File Thomas P. Grodt Julie A. Introcaso, Disciplinary Counsel Distribution:

March -1., 2012 ~~" C,,~~

reinstatement. this matter will be addressed prior to or in conjunction with Mr. Grodt's request for The Committee voted to stay the imposition of a sanction to the extent that the sanction in

the investigation and prosecution of this matter. The Committee accepts the Stipulation that Mr. Grodt shall pay all costs associated with III. COSTS

Stipulation ~~ 29-55 at 4-9.

violation of Rule 8.4(a). above Rules, there is necessarily clear and convincing evidence of a 53. Because there is clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Grodt violated the

violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct 8.1 (b). letters from the ADO represents clear and convincing evidence of a 49. Mr. Grodt's failure to respond to the June 7, 2011, and July 15,2011,

48. To date, Mr. Grodt has not responded.

consequences of his failure to cooperate. the docketed complaint, of his obligation to respond, and the potential 47. The ADO again wrote to Mr. Grodt on July 15,2011, reminding him of