Alexander R. Cain (2015)

THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

SUPREME COURT

ORDER LD-2015-0005, In the Matter of Alexander R. Cain, Esquire On April 13, 2015, the Attorney Discipline Office (ADO) filed a certified copy of the March 12, 2015 order of the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County (Massachusetts), which suspended Attorney Alexander R. Cain from the practice of law in Massachusetts for three years. After receiving this notification, this court issued an order, in accordance with Rule 37(12)(d), giving Attorney Cain and the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) an opportunity to advise the court if they believed that the imposition of identical or substantially similar discipline would be unwarranted. The PCC advised the court that it believed substantially different discipline was warranted. Attorney Cain filed no response. After reviewing the PCC’s response and the record of the Supreme Judicial Court, the court concluded that Attorney Cain’s misconduct warranted substantially different discipline in New Hampshire and remanded the matter to the PCC for a recommendation as to the appropriate sanction. After the matter was remanded to the PCC, the ADO and Attorney Cain reached an agreement that disbarment was the appropriate sanction. Attorney Cain also agreed to pay the ADO’s costs of investigating and prosecuting the matter. The PCC approved the agreement and recommended to the court that Attorney Cain be disbarred. A copy of the PCC’s recommendation was served upon ADO’s Disciplinary Counsel and Attorney Cain, and they were advised that they must identify any legal or factual issues relating to the PCC’s recommendation that they wished the court to review, and that if neither party requested review, no further hearing would be required. No response to the order was filed. Having reviewed the PCC record and the record of the Supreme Judicial Court proceedings, the court concludes that disbarment is warranted. The record indicates that Attorney Cain was found to have committed misconduct in his handling of four separate legal matters. The Supreme Judicial Court found that Attorney Cain violated Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1, 1.2(a), 1.3, 1.4, 1.16(e), 8.4(c), (d), and (h). It found that Attorney Cain repeatedly and intentionally misrepresented to clients the status of their cases and fabricated court documents to support his misrepresentations.