Attorney Grievance Commission v. Cooper

ORDER The three judge panel having found respondent guilty of violating the Code of Professional Responsibility as set forth in the panel’s opinion, herewith attached, for which Maryland Rule BV11 a 1 requires a recommendation of either disbarment, suspension or reprimand; and The panel having further found that respondent’s misconduct resulted from his inability to render adequate legal service “by reason of mental or physical illness or infirmity, or addiction to or dependence upon an intoxicant or drug”; and The panel having stated that respondent’s “incompetency continues at this time” and it having recommended that respondent be placed on inactive status as provided for in Maryland Rule BV11 a 2; and The Court having carefully considered the opinion of the panel and its recommendation, together with the reasons assigned at oral argument as a result of the Court’s order that respondent show cause why he should not be disbarred or suspended; it is this 4th day of March, 1977. ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that LeRoy A. Cooper be, and he is hereby, suspended from the practice of law for an indefinite.period; and it is further ORDERED that the clerk of this Court shall strike the name of LeRoy A. Cooper from the register of attorneys in this Court and certify that fact to the Trustees of the ⁶⁰⁷ Clients’ Security Trust Fund and the clerks of all judicial tribunals in the State in accordance with Rule BV13. Filed: March 4,1977 /s/ James C. Norris, Jr._ Clerk Court of Appeals of Maryland /&/ Robert C. Murphy_ /s/ Frederick J. Singley, Jr. /s/ Marvin H. Smith_ /s/ J. Dudley Digges_ /s/ Irving A. Levine /s/ John C. Eldridge /s/ Charles E. Orth, Jr. MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Pursuant to Maryland Rule BV9, the Court of Appeals of Maryland designated the undersigned judges as a panel for the hearing of charges of professional misconduct brought against the Respondent by the Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland. Hearings were held before the panel on November 3, 1976 and December 1, 1976.

Findings of Fact LeRoy A. Cooper, who was admitted to the Bar of this State in 1950, conducted two real estate settlements for Mr. and Mrs. Paul Brown of Baltimore, Maryland on September 29, 1973 and October 22, 1973 respectively. The Browns had been referred to the Respondent by Isaac Bristow, a real estate broker, who was instrumental in effecting the sales of the properties being settled. Both settlements took place at Bristow’s office at 2025 West North Avenue. On September 29, 1973, the sale of 1019 North Caroline Street was settled.

The Respondent prepared the settlement sheet for this transaction and prepared the deed effecting the transfer which he recorded for Paul Brown on November 9, 1973. The settlement sheet does not accurately reflect the money exchanged at settlement in that it indicates the sum of $207.70 was due the seller, when in fact the seller received from the purchaser the sum of $299.00 in monetary benefits, ⁶⁰⁸ as reflected in a receipt therefor executed by the seller which was prepared at settlement by the Respondent. Also, $51.00 was charged the parties by the Respondent for the cost of recording, documentary stamps, and transfer taxes, although the actual cost of these items, paid by the Respondent at the time of recording the deed, was only $17.40. In numerous other respects the settlement sheet was incompetently prepared.

The buyer at settlement paid $200.00 in cash to the Respondent, of which $87.80 was to be applied by the Respondent to the payment of an accrued water bill for the property as reflected on the settlement sheet. Respondent failed to pay the water bill and the buyer was required to pay this bill to the City of Baltimore in February, 1974, when he and his family were confronted with the delinquent account which they had assumed was satisfied from the settlement proceeds. Respondent testified that none of the monies received by him at the settlement was ever deposited in his own checking account or in any escrow account maintained by him. The deed for 1019 North Caroline Street was not recorded by the Respondent until 41 days after its execution and was never delivered to the buyer by the Respondent despite the buyer’s repeated requests for the same.

On October 22,1973, settlement for the sale of 1019 Valley Street by Mr. and Mrs. Paul Brown to Mr. and Mrs. Donald Lawson was conducted by the Respondent. The Lawsons had agreed to purchase the property for $4,500.00, $3,984.00 of which was to be secured by a purchase money mortgage in favor of the Browns. At settlement Respondent received a $500.00 check on behalf of the sellers. The Respondent disbursed no funds at settlement but rather gave one of the sellers, Paul Brown, a receipt for $363.00 with a notation that $337.00 was due seven days from that date.

This $337.00 apparently represented the net amount to the seller after deduction of their settlement allowances and expenses, and the delayed payment contemplated clearance by the drawee bank of the check proffered by the buyers at settlement. Respondent never paid the sellers any part of the $337.00 due them. We reject as incredible the Respondent’s ⁶⁰⁹ suggestion that the $337.00 represented an amount due the buyers or Respondent from the sellers over and above the $500.00 which was delivered by the buyer at settlement. The Respondent has failed to produce any written record of this settlement notwithstanding the summons issued to him requiring the production of all his files in connection with this transaction at the hearing.

Respondent’s excuse for the non-production, that his records are in the possession of the broker, Bristow, did not relieve him, in our opinion, of his responsibility to retrieve these files for production to this panel or at least to substantiate their whereabouts by téstimony from Bristow or others. None of the money received by the Respondent at settlement was ever deposited in his checking account or in any escrow account maintained by him. The deed and the purchase money mortgage which Respondent prepared to consummate the settlement were not recorded until November 9, 1973, and the mortgage was never delivered to Mr. and Mrs. Brown by Respondent despite their repeated requests for the same. The balance of the charges preferred against the Respondent grow out of his handling of the estate of Addie T. Young, late of Baltimore, Maryland.

When this testatrix died on