Sharon L. Demmerle (2007)

of the fee paid to the respondent for filing the bankruptcy petition. that the respondent violated this rule by failing to return any portion client any funds that the client is entitled to receive. The PCC alleged (3) Rule 1. 15(b). This rule requires a lawyer to promptly deliver to a

and about the filing of the bankruptcy petition. requests for information about the status of the bankruptcy matter respondent violated this rule by failing to respond to the client's requests for information about the matter. The PCC alleged that the informed regarding the status of a matter and to promptly respond to (2) Rule 1.4. This rule requires a lawyer to keep a client reasonably

fee for this service. petition on behalf of a client after agreeing to do so and accepting a that the respondent violated this rule by failing to file a bankruptcy promptness and diligence in representing a client. The PCC alleged (1) Rule 1.3(a). This rule requires a lawyer to act with reasonable

the petition alleged violations of the following Rules of Professional Conduct: deemed to be admitted and no further hearing shall be required." In this case, the Professional Conduct Committee, the allegations of the petition"shall be 37(16)(c) provides that if a respondent attorney fails to answer a petition filed by The respondent has not filed an answer to the pec's petition. Rule

bar association is deemed sufficient. with Rule 37(16)(b), service of the petition at the latest address provided to the court unclaimed, the petition sent by first class mail was not. In accordance Although the petition sent to the respondent by certified mail was returned to the of service or the allegations of the petition would be deemed to be admitted. respondent that she was required to file an answer to the petition within 30 days respondent to the New Hampshire Bar Association. The order notified the respondent by first class and certified mail to the latest address provided by the Demmerle. The court issued an order requiring that the petition be sent to the petition seeking the disbannent of the respondent, Attorney Sharon L. On January 17, 2007, the Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) filed a

LD-2007-0001, In tbe Matter ofSbaron L. Demmerle

Debbie Bills, Supreme Court NH Bar Association ..,;Margaret H. Nelson, Chair Landya B. McCafferty, Esquire Sharon L. Demmerle, Esquire Professional Conduct Committee Distribution:

DATE: May 14, 2007

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

investigation and prosecution of this matter. assessed all expenses incurred by the Professional Conduct Committee in the from the practice of law in New Hampshire. Attorney Demmerle is hereby THEREFORE, the court orders that Sharon L. Demmerle tie disbarred

this case. court's order, the court concludes that disbarment is the appropriate sanction in failure to cooperate with the Attorney Discipline Office and to respond to this Based on the serious nature of the violations and on Attorney Demmerh~'s

admitted. In accordance with Rule 37(16)(c), the committee's allegations are deemed

Rules of Professional Conduct. (5) Rule 8.4(a). This rule makes it professional misconduct to violate the

complaint. complaint and by failing to appear at the PCC hearings on the the Attorney Discipline Office'srequest for a response to a misconduct alleged that the respondent violated this rule by failing to respond to lawful demand for information from a disciplinary authority. The PCC (4) Rule 8.1(b). This rule prohibits a lawyer from failing to respond to