Timothy J.A. Barrett (2013)

Box 69,North Conway, New Hampshire 03860-0069.

Barrettoperatedhis law office as Barrett Law, PLLC, 2655 WhiteMountain Highway, PO

admittedtopracticeon November 15,2011. At all timesmaterialto thisproceeding,Mr.

1. Mr. Barrettis anattorneylicensedtopracticelaw inNew Hampshire. Mr. Barrettwas

following factual findings by clear andconvincingevidence:

The ProfessionalConduct Committee hasdeterminedthat theRecord supportsthe

and rulingsoflaw asdetailedbelow:

Van Oot and LisaWellman-Ally. The ProfessionalConduct Committee makes factualfindings

Alan J.Cronheim, Richard H. Darling, Elaine Holden,Heather E. Krans,Richard D. Sager,Martha

BenettePizzimenti,Vice Chair,Toni M. Gray, Vice Chair,Thomas P. Connair,Susan R. Chollet,

deliberatedtheabove-referencedmatter. Memberspresentwere David M.Rothstein,Chair,

On April16,2013,theProfessionalConduct Committee reviewed therecordand

Barrett, TimothyJ.A. advs. AttorneyDisciplineOffice # 12-028

RichardH. Darling* Holly B. Fazzino,Administrator Alan J.Cronheim * nonattorneymember Thomas P. Connair Lisa Wellman-Ally Susan R. Chollet* Martha Van Oot Toni M. Gray,* ViceChair 603-224-5828 ♦ Fax 228-9511 Richard D. Sager Benette Pizzimenti,Vice Chair Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Heather E. Krans David M. Rothstein,Chair 4 Chenell Drive, Suite 102 ElaineHolden*

case further and prepare for theupcoming hearing.

8. Ms. Martin made an appointmenttomeet with Mr. Barrett on June 12,2012, to discussher

hopefullyachievea fair result.

that shevery much needed Mr. Barrett at the June18,2012, hearingto advocate for her and

was a "seriousbully,"thatbeing in the sameroom with him caused her extreme stress, and

7. During theirearlydiscussions,Ms. Martinmade clear to Mr. Barrett that herex-husband

childtaxexemptions and tomodify the parenting plan.

The hearing was on themeritsto address herPetitionto adjustchildsupportand dependent

6. Ms. Martin was scheduledto appear at a June18,2012, hearing inConway Family Court.

cases.

5. Mr. Barrett had contractedwithLegal Eagles to perform paralegalwork in a fewofhis

staff.

attorneys, on a contract basis,who require paralegalhelpbut do not have a paralegal on

Eagles, LLC. Legal Eagles providesparalegalassistance to pro se litigants and to

4. Ms. Martin had been referredto Mr. Barrett by BarbaraReilly,who is a partnerofLegal

Court. Ms. Martin paid Mr. Barrett a $2500 retainer.

3. On May 14, 2012, Maria Martin retained Mr. Barrett torepresenther inConway Family

Respondent'sConduct intheUnderlying Family Court Matter

Court onFebruary11,2013,forfailureto file his2012 trust accounting certificate.

However, Mr. Barrett wasadministrativelysuspendedby theNew Hampshire Supreme

2. Mr. Barrett has no historyofany previous discipline in the StateofNew Hampshire. p. 3 Page 3 of14

pertainingtoherfamilycourtmatter.

she hadjusthiredMr. Barrett,and thatshe hadcopiesofallnecessarydocuments

Ms. Martin statedtoDisciplinaryCounsel thatherfile didnot have many materialsin it, as

15. In fact, Mr.Barretthad nevergivenMs. Martin'sfile toanyone atLegal Eagles. However,

been turnedover toyour paralegalat LegalEagles."

14. Mr. Barrettalsostatedin his June 26,2012, letter:"[f]oryour convenience,your files have

filedinhercase and alsoenclosed thefullamount ofherretainer.

and could nolongerrepresenther. He enclosed aNoticeofWithdrawal that he hadjust

letter from Mr. Barrett. The letter informed her that Mr. Barrett was closing his practice

13. Ms. Martin did not hearfurtherfrom Mr. BarrettuntilJune 26,2012, when she receiveda

left a telephone message for him the next day reiterating that request.

sent him an email requesting that he return her retainer in full within seven days. She also

12. On the eveningofJune18,2012, Ms.Martin,frustratedby Mr. Barrett's failure toappear,

11. Ms. Martin'sex-husbandwas representedby counselduringthe June18hearing.

he could not attend the hearing.

appeared, and Ms.Martinrepresentedherself. Mr.Barrettdid notinformMs. Martinthat

10. On June18,2012,Ms. Martinappearedfor the scheduledhearing.Mr. Barrett never

week. Mr. Barrett never returned any of her calls.

phoneafterhefailedto bepresentfortheirmeetingandcontinuedto callthefollowing

that hewouldnot beavailableforthemeeting.Ms. Martinattemptedtoreachhim by

9. Mr. Barrettdid not appearfor the June 12,2012,meeting.He neverinformedMs. Martin p. 4 Page 4 of14

with the Post Office.

Conway Postmasterseekingany informationsuch as apossibleforwardingaddresson file

Hampshire Bar Association.DisciplinaryCounsel alsosubmitteda form to theNorth

email,and viawrittencorrespondenceto thecurrentaddresson filewith theNew

23. During November 2012, DisciplinaryCounsel attemptedtoreachMr. Barrettby phone,

Barrett'smattertoDisciplinaryCounsel.

22. By letterdatedOctober 15,2012,theComplaint ScreeningCommittee referredMr.

Investigation."

Supreme Court Rule 37(11)governing"ResignationBy AttorneyUnder Disciplinary

practiceand does not intendtopracticelaw in the future.That letterdoes not conform to

21. Mr. Barrett'sletterdatedSeptember 12,2012, statedthatMr. Barretthad closedhis

respond.

20. Mr. Barrett'sletterdatedAugust 14,2012,requestedan extensionoftime inwhich to

actualsubstanceofMs. Martin'sclaim.

19. Mr. Barretthas submittedtwolettersto theADO. Neither letter, however, respondedto the

July 16, 2012, August 16, 2012, and September 17, 2012.

18. The ADO issued three letters requesting information from Mr. Barrett, dated

July 16, 2012.

17. The AttorneyDisciplineOffice(ADO) receivedMs. Martin'swrittengrievanceon

Correspondence between Respondent and AttorneyDisciplineOffice

but not the amount she requested. She felt, however, that the overall result was fair.

16. As aresultoftheJune18,2012,hearing,Ms. Martinreceivedanincreaseinchildsupport, p. 5 Page 5 of14 and was returnedto the ADO.

lastknown addressand alsoemailed to Mr. Barrett.The certifiedletterwas never delivered

28. On December 5,2012, a NoticeofCharges was issued. It wassentviacertifiedmail to the

was grantedon November 30, 2012.

requesting that the ADO be allowed to serve the NoticeofCharges via email. The motion

27. On November 28,2012, DisciplinaryCounsel filed aMotion forAlternativeService

pendingdisciplinarymatter. this email. Please get in touch with me immediately regarding your be heard. I do not have a physical address orphone number for you; only We have made every attempt tocontactyou and give you anopportunityto substanceofMs. Martin'scomplaint. Supreme Court Rules governingresignation,you neverrespondedto the practiceoflaw. However, not only does that letter not comply with the against you. You sent us a letterindicatingyour desire toresignfrom the As you know, our office has a complaint from Maria Martin that is pending

Disciplinary Counsel sent an email to Mr. Barrett on November 27,2012,stating in part:

26. Having Mr. Barrett'semail for the first time as a resultofMs. Reilly'sinformation,

Icloseddown my law office. can refuse to participate in its perversion. I could walk away. And I did. So the corrupt sham I may not be able to defend [the Constitution], but I unable to live up to my oath, and by continuing to practice law, I was partof defend the Constitution...I began to feel that being an attorney I was I have had several posts that requiredme to take an oath to support and

practice and stated in part:

Ms. ReillyofLegalEagles,Mr. Barrettaskedforgivenessfor his "suddendeparture"from

25. In an emailsent tocolleagueson October3,2012,whichwas sharedwith theADO by

there and living "in a small village in the CaucasusMountains."

anindependentstatewhichwas partof theformerSovietUnion. He isteachingEnglish

24. DisciplinaryCounselultimatelydeterminedthatMr. BarrettiscurrentlylivinginGeorgia, p. 6 Page 6 of14

December 16, 2012.

Barrettdid notrespond toDisciplinaryCounsel'slastemail,which was senton

Counsel and Mr. Barrettemailedback and forthregardingwhen tospeak by phone. Mr.

32. From approximatelyDecember 14,2012,throughDecember 16,2012, Disciplinary

activedisciplinarymatters. ofa hearing),have that approved, and then you couldresignwithoutany The more efficientalternativeis toconsentto some formofdiscipline(short process.I canexplainthat more to youwhen we (hopefully)talk. Resigningwhile a disciplinarymatterispending isnot a straightforward

conferenceand furtherstating:

31. On December 10 ,DisciplinaryCounsel again wrote to Mr.Barrettsuggestinga telephone th Charges.

30. Disciplinary Counsel responded, asking that Mr. Barrett confirm receiptofthe Noticeof

Timothy Barrett Thank you foryour consideration. misconduct? some sortofresolution, shortofa formal hearing or admissionof inappropriate,since I am no longer practicing law. Is it possible to come to Obviously a periodofprobation or something similar would be you suggest? What would be the normal penalty for what is alleged? resign,withoutformaldisciplinaryproceedings.Alternatively,what would I do not intend on practicing law. I would respectfully request permission to sorry. Unfortunately, a court appearance was (allegedly) missed. For that I am I attempted to close down my office in an efficient and expeditious manner. countryofGeorgia. Email is the best way to contact me. I am sorry for the delay inresponding.I am indeed currently living in the Ms. Greene,

November 28th.He stated as follows:

29. On December 9,2012,Mr. Barrett respondedto Disciplinary Counsel's emailof p. 7 Page 7 of14 clearand convincingevidencethat Mr.Barrett'sconductviolated Rule 8.4(c), asoriginallycharged. "purpose to deceive.") Upon further review and investigation, Disciplinary Counsel has determined that there is not violation. See, e.g., In re Clark, 207 Ariz. 414, 417 (2004); see also Rule 1.0(d)(definingfraud asrequiringa deceit ormisrepresentation."A knowing or intentional stateofmind is a factualpredicatefor a Rule8.4(c) 1 Rule8.4(c)statesthatit isprofessionalmisconductforalawyerto"engageinconductinvolvingdishonesty,fraud,

a violationofRule 1.3.

38. There is clear andconvincingevidencethat Mr.Barrett'sconductin thisrespectconstitutes

by failing to appear at the hearing in family court scheduled for June18,2012.

Martin'smatter, by failing to appear at hisscheduledJune 12,2012,meetingwith her, and

37. Mr. Barrettbreachedhis dutyunder Rule 1.3by failing toundertakeany work on Ms.

a client. A lawyer shall act with reasonable diligence andpromptnessinrepresenting

36. Rule 1.3 statesas follows:

35. Factualfindingsset forthabove areincorporatedby reference.

ofthe Hearing Panel Report.

ofProfessionalConduct1.3,1.4,1.16(d),and 8.I.1Thisconclusionisconsistentwiththefindings

that Mr. Barrett has violated the following RulesofProfessionalConduct: New Hampshire Rules

The ProfessionalConductCommitteeconcludesthat there is clear andconvincingevidence

Court on February 11,2013.

34. DisciplinaryCounselalsoforwardedacopyofthesuspensionorderissuedby theSupreme

appointedwas forwardedto him on the same date.

viaemail.A copyoftheJanuary14,2013,letterrequestingthatahearingpanelbe

33. DisciplinaryCounselhascontinuedtokeepMr. Barrettapprisedof thestatusof thismatter p. 8 Page 8 of14

counsel,surrenderingpapers and property towhich theclientisentitledand reasonablenoticeoftheclient,allowingtime foremployment ofother theextentreasonablypracticabletoprotecta client'sinterests,such as giving (d) As aconditiontoterminationofrepresentation,a lawyer shalltakestepsto

44. Rule 1.16(d)statesas follows:

43. Factualfindingsset forth above areincorporatedby reference.

Rule 1.16(d):Decliningor Terminating Representation

a violationofRule 1.4.

42. There is clear andconvincingevidence that Mr.Barrett'sconductin thisrespectconstitutes

emailand many phone callsfollowingthe June18 hearing.

41. Mr. Barrett furtherbreachedhis duty under Rule1.4by failing torespondto Ms.Martin's

instancesto inform Ms. Martin ofhisinability(orunwillingness)to appear.

meeting with Ms. Martin;failing toappearat the June18,2012, hearing;and failinginboth

40. Mr. Barrettbreachedhis dutyunder Rule 1.4by failing toappearfor hisJune 12,2012,

permittedby theRules ofProfessionalConduct or otherlaw. conductwhen the lawyerknows that theclientexpectsassistancenot (5)consultwith theclientaboutany relevantlimitationon thelawyer's (4)promptlycomply with reasonablerequestsforinformation;and (3) keep the client reasonably informed about the statusofthe matter; client's objectives are to be accomplished; (2) reasonably consult with the client about the means by which the Rules; respect to which the client's informed consent is required by these (1) promptly inform the clientofany decision or circumstance with (a) Alawyershall:

Rule 1.4 statesas follows:

39. Factualfindingssetforthaboveareincorporatedbyreference.

a violationofRule 8.1.

51. There is clear andconvincingevidence that Mr.Barrett'sconductin thisrespectconstitutes

lawful requests forinformation.

50. Mr. Barretthas breachedhis duty to cooperate with the ADO by failing torespondto its

(c) fail to attend a hearing when ordered to do so by a disciplinary authority. protectedby Rule 1.6; or except that this Rule does not require disclosureofinformation otherwise demand forinformationfrom anadmissionsordisciplinaryauthority, person to have arisen in the matter, or knowingly fail to respond to a lawful (b) fail to disclose a fact necessary to correct amisapprehensionknown by the (a) knowingly make a falsestatementofmaterialfact; or admissionapplicationor inconnectionwith adisciplinarymatter,shall not: An applicant foradmissionto the bar, or a lawyer inconnectionwith a bar

49. Rule 8.1 statesas follows:

48. Allegationsset forthabove areincorporatedby reference.

a violationofRule 1.16(d).

47. There is clear and convincing evidence that Mr.Barrett'sconduct in this respect constitutes

to her.

46. Mr. Barrett also breached his duty under Rule1.16(d)by failing to return Ms.Martin'sfile

representationatthathearing.

of hisintenttowithdrawinadvanceof theJune18,2012,hearing,thusleavingherwithout

45. Mr. BarrettbreachedhisdutyunderRule1.16(d)byfailingtogiveMs. Martinanynotice

permittedby law. orincurred.The lawyermay retainpapersrelatingto the clientto the extent refundinganyadvancepaymentoffeeorexpensethat has not beenearned p. 10 Page 10 of14

clientfilewhen in factMr. Barretthad not deliveredher file tothatentity.

withdraw from hisrepresentationofMs. Martin, and hemisrepresentedthat Legal Eagles held her

her matter and his availability to represent her interests. Mr. Barrett also failed to properly

promptly with respect to Ms. Martin, and he failed to communicate with her regarding the statusof

Under the first prongofthe analysis, Mr. Barrett violated his duty to act diligently and

baselinesanction. Id.

ofthe analysis: the existenceofany aggravating or mitigating factors and whether they affect the

at 303.Once thebaselinesanctionisdetermined,theCourt then lookstothefourthand finalpart

characterizing themisconductand determining a baseline sanction. See Conner's Case, 158 N.H.

621 (2007)); Standards § 3.0. The first three partsofthe analysis create the framework for

(d) theexistenceofaggravatingor mitigatingfactors." Id. (quoting Douglas' Case, 156 N.H. 613,

thelawyer'smental state; (c) thepotentialor actualinjurycaused by thelawyer'smisconduct;and

forth a four part analysis for courts to consider in imposing sanctions: "(a) the duty violated; (b)

Standards, itlookstothem forguidance. Conner's Case, 158 N.H. at 303. The Standards set

misconduct." Coffey'sCase, 152 N.H. 503,513 (2005). Although the Court has not adopted the

Case, 158N.H. 299, 303 (2009). "The sanction must take into account the severityofthe

theintegrityof thelegalprofession,andpreventsimilarconductin thefuture." E.g.,Conner's

Court'sdisciplinarypower"is toprotectthepublic,maintainpublicconfidencein thebar,preserve

circumstances,thissanctionwouldservethepurposesofattorneydiscipline.The purposeof the

("Standards'") supporttheconclusionthatMr. Barrettshouldreceivea publiccensure.Underthe

The AmericanBarAssociation's StandardsforImposingLawyer Sanctions (1992)

III. SANCTION ANALYSIS p. 11 Page 11 of14 Section4.43 uses the term"Reprimand." The most analogoussanctioninNew Hampshire is aPublicCensure. 2

no actualor potentialinjuryto aclient. not actwith reasonablediligenceinrepresentinga client,and causeslittleor 4.43 Admonition3isgenerallyappropriatewhen a lawyerisnegligentand does potentialinjuryto a client. act withreasonablediligence inrepresentinga client,and causesinjury or 4.42 Reprimand2isgenerallyappropriatewhen alawyerisnegligentand doesnot injury to a client. (b) a lawyer engages in a patternofneglect and causesinjuryor potential injury orpotentialinjury to a client; or (a) a lawyer knowingly fails toperformservicesfor aclientand causes 4.41 Suspensionis generally appropriate when:

Lack ofDiligence:

determininga baselinesanction.Relevantprovisionsset forthbelow appearat Standards § 4.4,

Inconjunctionwith the foregoing assessment, the Standards offermaterialguidancein

found thatthejudge treatedher fairly.

ofan adverse ruling. Ms.Martinreceived less than the childsupportshe requested,but,overall,

hearing as aresultofhavingtoappearpro se. As an unrepresentedlitigant,she was atseriousrisk

potential injury to Ms. Martin. Ms. Martin was stressed and anxious during the June18,2012,

As to the third prongofthe analysis, Mr.Barrett'sconductcausedsome actual and

June26,2012,but it was at the very least a negligentmisrepresentation.

file toLegalEagles may havereflectedhisoriginalintentionat the time he wrote the letter dated

Martin'sJune 18 hearing through error. Mr.Barrett'sstatement that he had delivered Ms.Martin's

December9,2012,heattemptedtowind down hispracticeand withdrawproperly,butmissedMs.

misconductappearsto be theproductofnegligence.As he statesin his emaildated

Withrespectto thesecondprongof thesanctionanalysis,the bulk of Mr. Barrett's p. 12 Page 12 of14 3 Section4.44usestheterm"Admonition."The mostanalogoussanctioninNew Hampshireis aReprimand.

thatMr. Barrettis nolongerpracticinglaw in this State.

discipline.In issuing a public censure, theCommitteenotes and is especially mindfulofthe fact

potential harm. Under suchcircumstances,a public censure would serve the purposesofattorney

Martin'sJune 18 hearing, negligently violated other duties owed to her, and caused actual and

cessationofpractice may be permanent.) He attempted to wind down his practice, but missed Ms.

October12,2012, email to colleagues, and his later emails to Disciplinary Counsel, his move and

drastic, life decision to stop practicing law and leave the country. (By the toneofhis

In short, it appears that Mr. Barrett, newly admitted to the Bar, made a sudden, and rather

Barrettdid returnto Ms.Martin her entireretainer. Standards, § 9.32.

disciplinaryrecord, and inexperience in the practiceoflaw. While not "restitution," per se, Mr.

Mitigatingfactors in this case include absenceofa dishonestmotive,absenceofa prior

whereabouts and has never responded to the substanceofMs. Martin'scomplaint.

ADO, he left thejurisdictionwithoutinformingthe New Hampshire Bar Associationofhis

requests for information. Standards, § 9.22. Although he sporadically communicated with the

The only aggravating factor in this case is Mr.Barrett'sfailure to comply with theADO's

whetherthere are aggravatingor mitigatingcircumstancesthat might affect the ultimate sanction.

censure. Standards, § 4.42.Havingdetermineda baselinesanction,theremainingquestionis

potentialharm toMs. Martin.Accordingly,thebaselinesanctionin thiscaseshouldbe apublic

did itappearto beknowingorintentional.It wasnegligentconductthatcausedactualand

Inthiscase,Mr. Barrett'smisconductdidnotinvolveapatternofneglectnor,takenin itstotality, p. 13 Page 13 of14

1.16(d),8.1.

with a public censure forviolatingNew Hampshire RulesofProfessionalConduct 1.3,1.4,

For allofthe above reasons,the ProfessionalConduct Committee sanctionsMr. Barrett

matter.

The Respondent shall pay all costs associated with theinvestigationand prosecutionofthis

(quotationand citationomitted).

profession,and preventsimilarconductin thefuture." Grew's Case, 156 N.H. 361,365 (2007)

rathertoprotectthepublic,maintainpublicconfidencein the bar,preservetheintegrityofthe legal

("Standards'''). The purposeoftheCourt'sdisciplinarypower is"notto inflictpunishment but

sanction is also in accord with the ABA Standardsfor ImposingLawyer Sanctions (2005)

e.g.,Conner'sCase, 158 N.H. 303 (2009); Richmond'sCase, 152 N.H. 155, 159-60 (2005). This

Committee'srecommendedsanctionis inaccordwith thepurposesofattorneydiscipline. See,

Committeeconcludesthat theappropriatedisciplinein this matter is a publiccensure.The

Havingmade theaforementionedfindingsand rulings,theProfessionalConduct

IV. SANCTION p. 14 Page 14 of 14

File Timothy J.A.Barrett,(viaemail) Sara S. Greene. DisciplinaryCounsel Distribution:

l_M£ J 2013

paragraph. appealto theNew Hampshire Supreme Court. See also Supreme Court Rule 37(3)(c),last PursuanttoSupreme Court Rule 37(A)(III)(d)(2)(D)(4)(A),Mr. Barretthas the right to VII. RIGHT TO APPEAL