| Description: |
John Michael Unfred (WSBA No. 20729, admitted 1991), of Salem, Oregon, was ordered to receive a reprimand on April 20, 2010, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court imposing reciprocal discipline in accordance with an order of the Oregon Supreme Court. For more information, see the Oregon State Bar Bulletin (November 2008), available at www.osbar.org/publications/bulletin/08nov/baractions.html, as follows:
On October 12, 2008, the [Oregon] disciplinary board reprimanded Salem attorney John Michael Unfred for violations of RPC 1.3 (neglect of a legal matter); RPC 1.4(a) (failure to keep client reasonably informed and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information) and RPC 1.5(a) (charging a clearly excessive fee).
Unfred undertook to represent a dissolution client in April 2006, agreeing to charge her at a discounted rate pursuant to a contract that Unfred had earlier entered with the client’s employee assistance program. During the representation, which lasted approximately one year, Unfred billed the client at the undiscounted rate. In June 2007, after becoming dissatisfied with Unfred’s inactivity on her case, the client fired him, complained to the bar and demanded that he return her entire retainer. Unfred did so.
For several months after Unfred was retained, he was active on the client’s case. However, after January 2007, the client telephoned and emailed Unfred with questions and requests for action, but received only occasional, non-substantive responses from Unfred’s paralegal.
Unbeknownst to the client, Unfred was not receiving her telephone calls and emails. Unfred’s paralegal was intercepting them and then failing to pass them along to him. Unfred was unaware that the client was trying to contact him until she fired him in June 2007.
Unfred did no work on the client’s case between January 2007 and June 2007, nor did he communicate with her during this time.
By billing the client at the undiscounted rate, Unfred charged a clearly excessive fee, even though he ultimately refunded her entire retainer. Unfred also failed to adequately supervise his staff and failed to act diligently on his client’s case, effectively leaving her dissolution unattended for several months. Mitigating circumstances in this case include the absence of dishonest or selfish motive, personal or emotional problems, a cooperative attitude toward disciplinary proceedings, and a timely good faith effort to make restitution or rectify consequences of misconduct.
Unfred was admitted to practice in Oregon in 1989. He had no prior disciplinary record.
Joanne S. Abelson represented the Bar Association. Mr. Unfred represented himself.
|