This page is an unofficial mirror and is not legal advice. Verify the document against the official source before relying on it.
Sharon L. Demmerle (2007)
allegations of the Notice of Charges were deemed admitted. fd. The allegations of the Notice of
to the Notice of Charges. N.H. Sup. Ct. R. 37A(III)(b)(3)(A). Because she did not do so the
Ms. Demmerle had thirty days from the date of service (May 22, 2006) to file an Answer
dated June 12,2006, to all of which the Respondent failed to respond.
Fact and Rulings of Law and Request for Costs, and the ADO's Memorandum on Sanction, both
July 28,2006, and at which the Respondent did not appear), the ADO's Proposed Findings of
the Hearing Panel Report foilowing a Finai Hearing on Issue of Sanction Only (held on
The Committee reviewed the record, including the Notice of Charges of May 24,2006,
Chair, was absent. No member was recused from deliberation.
Cole, Richard H. Darling, Gretchen Rule Hamel, and David N. Page. Benette Pizzimenti, Vice
Cronheim, Gerald A. Daly, Thomas P. Connair, Ellen L. Arnold, James R. Martin, David N.
"Committee") were present: Margaret H. Nelson, Chair, Toni M. Gray, Vice Chair, Alan J.
Respondent did not appear. The following members of the Professional Conduct Committee (the
Disciplinary Counsel, appeared on behalf of the Attorney Discipline Office ("ADO"). The
A hearing was held in this matter on November 21,2006. James L. Kruse, Assistant
FOR IMMEDIATE INTERIM SUSPENSION AND DISBARMENT RECOMMENDATION FOR PETITION TO SUPRE~IE COURT
Demmer/e, Sharon L. advs. Joyce A Smith # 05-090
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. Mmtin Toni M. Gray, * Vice Chair 603-224-5828. Fax 228-9511 Gretchen Rule Hamel Benette Pizzimenti, Vice Chair Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Richard H. Darling* Margaret H. Nelson, Chair 4 Park Street, Suite 304 Gerald A. Daley*
Professional Conduct Committee New Hampshire Supreme Court the necessary bankruptcy paperwork from the court.
6. In July 2004, Ms. Demmerle contacted Ms. Smith and informed her that she had obtained
5. In or about May 2004, Ms. Smith had paid Ms. Demmerle the $500.00 fee in full.
complete the paperwork.
the bankruptcy court that week and telephone Ms. Smith to set up a time for Ms. Smith to
""T. Ms. Delmnerle informed Ms. Smith that she would obtain the necessary paperwork from A
Ms. Smith to make payments in weekly installments.
Smith agreed to pay Ms. Demmerle a flat fee of $500.00. The fee agreement permitted
Demmerle agreed to file and represent Ms. Smith on a bankruptcy petition, and Ms.
3. During that meeting, Ms. Smith signed a fee agreement with Ms. Demmerle in which Ms.
2. In March 2004, Joyce A. Smith met with Ms. Demmerle at her law office in Bedford.
Wheelock Street, Apt. 2, Mcu'1chester, New Hampshire, 03102.
Lebanon, New Hampshire, 03784-3402. Ms. Demmerle has a current address of 15
03101-2105; and (c) Demmerle Law Office, PLLC, 10 Benning Street, PMB 259, West
Demmerle Law Office, PLLC, 816 Elm Street, No. 305, Manchester, New Hampshire,
Coldstream Park, 116G South River Road, Bedford, New Hampshire, 03110-6371; (b)
Demmerle has utilized the following addresses: (a) Demmerle Law Office, PLLC,
was admitted to practice on December 5, 1996. At times material to this proceeding, Ms.
1. Ms. Demmerle is an attorney licensed to practice law in New Hampshire. Ms. Demmerle
I. FINDINGS OF FACT
Charges being admitted, the Committee makes the following findings of fact and rulings of law. In that letter, Ms. Smith requested that, in the event that Ms. Demmerle was not willing to
her bankruptcy petition and again requested guidance with respect to the creditor lawsuit.
14. In a letter to Ms. Denunerle dated Julv 13..t;l,/ 2005. Ms. Smith inquired about the status of ~
Smith's telephone calls.
Demmerle in an effort to make contact with her. Ms. Demmerle did not respond to Ms.
13. Having received no response from Ms. Demmerle, Ms. Smith began telephoning Ms.
situation.
the lawsuit, attached a copy of the court notice, and inquired as to how to handle the
12. In a letter to Ms. Demmerle dated June 23, 2005, Ms. Smith informed Ms. Demmerle of
suit against her in Exeter District Court.
11. On or about June 15,2005, Ms. Smith received notice that one of her creditors had filed
any inquiries, etc. to the temporary address listed on tt1.is card until further notice."
a..lld mailing address in West Lebanon, New Hampshire. The card stated:"Please address
Summer of2005. The card contained new contact information including a phone number
that Ms. Demmerle was on a"medical leave" effective May 23,2005, through the
10. On or about May 16,2005, Ms. Demmerle mailed Ms. Smith a card informing Ms. Smith
Ms. Derr..merle.
9. However, between July, 2004, and May 16, 2005, Ms. Smith heard nothing further from
would be filing the bankruptcy petition shortly thereafter.
8. After filling out the paperwork in July, 2004, Ms. Smith understood that Ms. Demmerle
Demmerle's residence and completed the paperwork.
Demmerle's then-residence in Manchester. In July, 2004, Ms. Smith went to Ms.
7. Ms. Demmerle made arrangements forMs. Smith to complete the paperwork at Ms. Ms. Derrunerle.
September 29, 2005, Ms. Smith asserted allegations of professional misconduct against
21. In a letter to the Attorney Discipline Office dated September 26,2005, and sworn to on
learned that nothing had been filed on her behalf.
20. Having not heard from Ms. Demmerle, Ms. Smith called the bankruptcy court and
calls.
September 11 through September 17. Ms. Demmerle did not return any of her phone
19. In September, 2005, Ms. Smith telephoned Ms. Demmerle on a daily basis from
Demmerle that she needed to speak with Ms. Demmerle"right away."
that Ms. Demmerle still had done nothing to help her. Ms. Smith informed Ms.
conversation in which Ms. Demmerle promised to help her. In the letter, Ms. Smith noted
18. In a letter dated September 9, 2005, Ms. Smith referenced the late August telephone
Smith would not have to go to court as that was"part of the bankruptcy."
phone call, Ms. Demmerle assured Ms. Smith that she would"take care of it" and Ms.
17. In late August 2005, Ms. Smith spoke with Ms. Demmerle on the telephone. During that
assistance with the creditor lawsuit and information about the bankruptcy.
16. On August 16, 2005, Ms. Smith wrote yet another letter to Ms. Demmerle requesting
calls to the contact numbers that she had for Ms. Demmerle.
15. Still having heard nothing from Ms. Demmerle, Ms. Smith began making daily phone
her to another attorney.
complete the work, Ms. Demmerle should return the case file and $500.00 fee and refer Office for in hand service.
31. On April 19, 2006, the Notice of Charges was sent to the Hillsborough County Sheriffs
30.
matter.
29. On March 22, 2006, the Attorney Discipline Office issued aN otice of Charges in this
the $500.00 fee.
28. To date, Ms. Demmerle has neither returned Ms. Smith's file nor returned any portion of
Demmerle return the $500.00 fee to Ms. Smith.
27. In a letter to Ms. Demmerle dated November 10,2005, Mr. Lown requested that Ms.
representing her in that action.
her. Mr. Lownfiled a bankruptcy petition on Ms. Smith's behalf and is currently
26. In October 2005, Ms. Smith retained a new attorney, Bradley M. Lown, Esq., to assist
25. Ms. Demmerle did not respond to the October 3, 2005, complaint.
Hampshire, 03784-3402) on file with the New Hampshire Bar Association.
(Demmerle Law Office, PLLC, 10 Benning Street, PMB 259, West Lebanon, New
24. The October 3,2005, complaint was mailed to Ms. Demmerle'slast known address
Smith's allegations (the"October 3, 2005, complaint.").
Attorney Discipline Office had docketed a complaint against her on the basis of Ms.
Hampshire Supreme Court Attorney Discipline Office, informed Ms. Demmerle that the
23. In a letter dated October 3, 2005, James L. DeHart, General Counsel to the New
fee. In that letter, Ms. Smith also requested a copy ofthe fee agreement.
to return her file (which contained original bills and financial documents) and the $500.00
22. In a letter to Ms. Demmerle dated September 28,2005, Ms. Smith asked Ms. Demmerle bankruptcy petition and May 16, 2005, the date on which Ms. Demmerle informed Ms.
39. Between the date in July, 2004, when Ms. Smith completed the paperwork for the
Rule 1.4: Client Communication
violation ofN.H. R. Prof. Conduct 1.3(a).
38. Ms. Demmerle's failures in this regard constitute clear and convincing evidence of a
Smith.
37. Ms. Demmerle failed to act with reasonable promptness and diligence in representing Ms.
Smith had to retain a different attorney to file a bankruptcy petition.
36. In October, 2005, approximately eighteen months after retaining Ms. Demmerle, Ms.
but failed thereafter to take any action on Ms. Smith's part.
filed suit against her, Ms. Demmerle assured Ms. Smith that she would"take care of it,"
35. In September, 2005, after Ms. Smith had placed Ms. Demmerle on notice a creditor had
thereafter.
file a petition. Ms. Smith understood Ms. Demmerle would file a petition shortly
34. In July, 2004, Ms. Smith had completed the necessary paperwork for Ms. Demmerle to
behalf.
33. As described above, Ms. Demmerle failed to file a bankruptcy petition on Ms. Smith's
Rule 1.3(a): Diligence
Based on the above Findings of Fact, the Committee makes the following Rulings of Law:
II. RULINGS OF LAW
Deputy Daniel Grant.
32. On April 21, 2006, Sharon L. Demmerle was served the Notice of Charges in hand by Conduct 1.4(a) -(c).
about her case constitutes clear and convincing evidence ofa violation ofN.H. R. Prof.
45. Ms. Demmerle's failure to respond to Ms. Smith's repeated inquiries for information
never responded to these requests.
44. Ms. Smith made several requests for her file and a refund of her money. Ms. Demmerle
calls. Ms. Demmerle failed to respond to these attempts.
September 17,2005, to make further contact with Ms. Demmerle via letters and phone
43. After the phone conversation in late August, 2005, Ms. Smith attempted through
Rather, Ms. Demmerle assured Ms. Smith that Ms. Demmerle would"take care of it."
aspects of her situation and alternative courses of action then available to Ms. Smith.
42. During that phone call Ms. Demmerleagain failed to discuss the legal and practical
letters, but received no response from Ms. Demmerle until a telephone call in late August.
lawsuit and requested assistance, and thereafter made numerous phone calls and wrote
creditor had filed suit against her. Ms. Smith promptly notified Ms. Demmerle of this
41. Approximately one month after receiving this card, Ms. Smith received notice that a
on the card.
instructed Ms. Smith to cOIT'..municate with Ms. Demmerle via the newly provided address
alternative courses of action available to Ms. Smith. Rather, the May 16, 2005, card
bankruptcy case nor discussed the legal and practical aspects of her situation or
neither made alternative arrangements for Ms. Smith to receive representation in the
40. As of May 16,2005, the date of Ms. Demmerle's"medical leave," Ms. Demmerle had
inform Ms. Smith as to the status of her bankruptcy case.
Smith she was taking a"medical leave" for the summer, Ms. Demmerle made no effort to R. 37 A(2)(a)(5)(C), Ms. Demmerle was required to respond within 30 days.
53. The October 3, 2005, complaint informed Ms. Demmerle that, pursuant to N.H. Sup. Ct.
Ms. Smith's allegations.
the October 3, 2005, complaint that it had docketed a complaint against her based upon
52. As described in detail above, the Attorney Discipline Office informed Ms. Demmerle in
Rule 8.1(b): Failure to Cooperate
violation of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct l.15(b).
51. Ms. Dern:fuerle's failures in this regard constitute clear and convincing evidence ofa
Smith is entitled to receive.
50. Ms. Demmerle failed to promptly deliver to Ms. Smith funds and other property Ms.
49. Ms. Demmerle never returned any portion of Ms. Smith's money or file.
Smith had hired substitute counsel and wanted her file and money returned.
November 10,2005, letter to Ms. Demmerle, Ms. Demmerle was on notice that Ms.
48. As ofMs: Smith's September 28,2005, letter to Ms. Demmerle, and Mr. Lown's
a bankruptcy petition on Ms. Smith's behalf.
agreement to file a bankruptcy petition on Ms. Smith's behalf. Ms. Demmerle never filed
47. In 2004, Ms. Smith paid Ms. Demmerle $500.00 in exchange for Ms. Demmerle's
Rule 1.15(b): Safekeeping Property
of N.H. R. Prof. Conduct l.4(a) -(c).
Demmerle's failures in this regard constitute clear and convincing evidence of a violation
permit Ms. Smith to make informed decisions regarding the representation. Ms.
situation and alternative courses of action available to Ms. Smith in a manner that would
46. Ms. Demmerle failed to explain to Ms. Smith the legal and practical aspects of her failing to communicate with her client despite numerous attempts at contact by her client, and
representation, then doing nothing to assist her client in connection with that representation,
multiple offenses, including, but not limited to, accepting a retainer and undertaking
in the future." Coffey'S Case, 152 N.H. at 513 (quotation omitted). Ms. Demmerle committed
confidence in the bar, preserve the integrity of the legal profession, and prevent similar conduct
The pu.."Pose of the Court's disciplimuy power"is to protect the public, maintain public
conclusion that Ms. Demmerle should be disbarred from the practice of law for her conduct.
(1992) ("Standards"), to which our Supreme Court has looked for guidance, support the
law in New Hampshire and the American Bar Association's Standards For Imposing Sanctions
take into account the severity of the misconduct." Coffey's Case, 152 N.H. 503, 513 (2005). Case
The New Hampshire Supreme Court has noted that a professional conduct sanction"must
III. SANCTION
there is necessarily clear and convincing evidence of a violation of Rule 8A(a).
57. Because there exists clear and convincing evidence of violation ofthe above cite Rules,
Rule BAJa): General Rule
a violation ofl'-LH. R. Prof. Conduct 8.1 (b).
constitute a failure to cooperate with the Committee and clear and convincing evidence of
56. Ms. Demmerle's failure to respond to the above pleadings and to appear at either hearing
Hearing, and appeared at neither the July 28, nor the November 21,2006, hearing.
55. Ms. Demmerle did not respond to the complaint, subsequent pleadings, or the Notices of
authority.
54. The October 3,2005, complaintwas a lawful demand for information from a disciplinary File Sharon L. Demmerle, Esquire Landya B.:McCaffertj, Disciplinary Counsel Distribution:
January 2, 2007 \]'!~-
R. 37(19).
Demmerle the Committee's expenses of investigating and prosecuting this matter. N.H. Sup. Ct.
for Ms. Demmerle's immediate interim suspension and unconditional disbarment and assess Ms.
Misconduct, the Committee recommends that Disciplinary Counsel petition the Supreme Court
COmn1unication; 1.15(b), Safekeeping Client Property; 8.1 (b), Failure to Cooperate; and 8.4(a),
matter and violations of Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3 (a), Diligence; 1.4, Client
Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 37(A)(III)( d) (1 ), based on the undisputed facts of this
IV. CONCLUSION
Committee's consideration. See Standards § 9.32(a).
an aggravating factor. No mitigating factors have been presented for the Hearing Panel's or the
at either hearing held in this matter. A lack of cooperation in the attorney disciplinary process is
to respond to communications from the ADO, file an Answer to the Notice of Charges, or appear
failing to return her client's money or file. Standards § 9.22(d). In addition, Ms. Demmerle failed