| Description: |
Franklin County lawyer David W. Corkrum (WSBA No. 13699, admitted 1983) has been suspended for 45 days, following a hearing, by order of the Supreme Court dated March 15, 1999. The discipline is based upon his failure to diligently represent his clients, and failure to keep his clients advised about the status of their cases. The suspension became effective March 22, 1999.
Matter 1. In April 1992, Mr. Corkrum agreed to represent a client in a child support modification action. Mr. Corkrum stated that he prepared the Petition to Modify Child Support, but did not file the petition, because he wanted to serve the father first. In April 1992, the father, an active member of the armed forces, was ordered overseas as a part of Operation Desert Storm. The father returned to the United States in July 1992. Based on conversations with Mr. Corkrum, the client believed that the father had been served with the petition. The petition was never served on the father. Mr. Corkrum did not correct his client’s belief that the petition had been served, because he was on probation with the WSBA and wanted to resolve this matter favorably. In February 1993, Mr. Corkrum told his client that he had not served the petition. Although he asked to continue working on the case, on March 1, 1993, the client told Mr. Corkrum to stop working on her case. The client demanded her client file and $3,760, which she apparently calculated to include the amounts she paid Mr. Corkrum and what she could have received in increased child support. Mr. Corkrum wrote the client a check in that amount the same day. The client then demanded an additional $308. When Mr. Corkrum refused to pay the additional amount, the client filed a grievance with the WSBA.
Matter 2. A client retained Mr. Corkrum to represent him in a case against a company for wrongful exposure to chlorine gas. Mr. Corkrum concluded that it would be difficult to prove that the damage to the client’s lungs had been caused by the chlorine exposure, and not by his client’s own cigarette smoking. Although Mr. Corkrum had decided not to file a complaint, he did not convey this decision to the client. The statute of limitations on the client’s claim lapsed before Mr. Corkrum told the client that he would not file a complaint. The client filed a malpractice action against Mr. Corkrum, and obtained a $300,000 default judgment.
By failing to timely file and serve the Petition to Modify Child Support, Mr. Corkrum violated RPC 1.3 requiring a lawyer to diligently represent his clients; and RPC 3.2, requiring a lawyer to make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the client’s interests. By failing to tell one client that he had not filed and served the Petition to Modify Child Support, and another client that he had not filed a complaint before the statute of limitations had lapsed, Mr. Corkrum violated RPC 1.4, requiring a lawyer to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of the matter; and RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, fraud or misrepresentation.
Leslie Allen represented the Bar Association. James Egan represented Mr. Corkrum. The hearing officer was Robert Redman.
|