Attorney Grievance v. Caplan

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION * IN THE OF MARYLAND * COURT OF APPEALS * OF MARYLAND v. * Misc. Docket AG No. 9 DAVID OLLIE CAPLAN * September Term, 2022 ORDER WHEREAS, on July 5, 2022, Petitioner filed a Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action, alleging that Respondent violated Arizona Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c) (“It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: . . . engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or mispresentation[.]”) and Arizona Rule 43(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona concerning trust accounts and alleging that Respondent, as part of an Agreement for Discipline by Consent, stipulated that he engaged in conduct in violation of Arizona Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c) and Rule 43(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona and received a four-year suspension from the practice of law in Arizona, WHEREAS, Petitioner has alleged that, under Maryland Rule 19-737(e), exceptional circumstances exist warranting substantially different discipline in this State, namely, disbarment, WHEREAS, on July 6, 2022, this Court issued a Show Cause Order, directing Respondent to show cause in writing on or before August 22, 2022 based on the grounds set forth in Maryland Rule 19-737(e) why corresponding discipline should not be imposed, WHEREAS, Bar Counsel, on behalf of Petitioner, filed an Affidavit of Service averring that Respondent was served with the Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action and Show Cause Order on July 11, 2022, WHEREAS, Respondent failed to respond to the Show Cause Order issued on July 6, 2022, WHEREAS, on August 17, 2022, Bar Counsel filed Petitioner’s Response to Show Cause Order, requesting that Respondent be disbarred, WHEREAS, on August 25, 2022, this Court issued a second Show Cause Order, specifically directing Respondent to show cause in writing on or before September 9, 2022 why his conduct does not warrant imposition of substantially different discipline in this State than that imposed in Arizona, namely the sanction of disbarment, WHEREAS, Bar Counsel, on behalf of Petitioner, filed an Affidavit of Service averring that Respondent was served with the Petition for Disciplinary or Remedial Action and Show Cause Order of August 25, 2022, on August 29, 2022, WHEREAS, Respondent failed to respond to the Show Cause Order of August 25, 2022, WHEREAS, Respondent entered into an Agreement of Discipline by Consent with the State Bar of Arizona, which Respondent signed, in which Respondent conditionally admitted that his conduct violated Arizona Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c) and Arizona Rule 43(a), in exchange for the imposition of a four-year suspension from the practice of law in Arizona upon acceptance of the Agreement, WHEREAS, the Agreement of Discipline by Consent contained a statement of facts describing the underlying conduct, namely, that between 2015 and 2019, Respondent received funds totaling $51,760 paid to him by a client for fees associated with forty-six patent applications, but then failed to remit payment in those cases to the United States Patent and Trademark Office and instead transferred the funds to personal checking and savings accounts; Respondent failed to notify the client of his failure to make the necessary payments and in some instances falsely indicated to the client that the fees were paid; Respondent’s failure to remit payment to the United States Patent and Trademark Office resulted in several of the client’s patent applications being deemed abandoned; Respondent did not timely