From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Falcione

DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 12, 2013
No. 114 DB 2012 (Pa. Jul. 12, 2013)

Opinion

No. 114 DB 2012 Attorney Registration No. 71386

07-12-2013

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL Petitioner v. ALFRED JOSEPH FALCIONE Respondent


(Philadelphia)


PUBLIC REPRIMAND

Alfred Joseph Falcione, you stand before the Disciplinary Board, your professional peers and members of the public for the imposition of a public reprimand. It is an unpleasant task to publicly reprimand one who has been granted the privilege of membership in the bar of this Commonwealth. Yet as repugnant as this task may be, it has been deemed necessary that you receive this public discipline.

Mr. Falcione, on October 13, 2011, you received an Informal Admonition from Chief Disciplinary Counsel for your failure to prosecute an adoption, for which you had been retained in 2006. As a condition of the Admonition, you were required to complete the adoption. Following the imposition of the Admonition, you filed a petition for adoption with the Chester County Orphans' Court in December of 2011. You were provided with a correction letter by the clerk of court, but you failed to properly file the corrected documents. The docket entries for Chester County reveal that nothing had been filed since the original petition in December 2011.

During the time frame of this matter, you continuously misrepresented the status of the adoption to the natural mother, Dionna Harris. The emails that you exchanged with Ms. Harris contained statements for which you had no factual basis. Ms. Harris was led to believe that certain documents had been filed with the court and the court had everything it needed to proceed with the adoption.

You failed to comply with the condition that was attached to your Informal Admonition imposed in October of 2011, which required you to complete the adoption. Some seven years after being retained to handle an adoption of a two year old child, the adoption was never competed and the child was nine years of age at the time of the disciplinary hearing in this matter. You wholly failed to comply with your responsibilities, which led to your presence before this Board panel for public discipline.

Your actions have violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct:

1. RPC 8.4(c) - It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
2. RPC 8.4(d) - It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.
3. Having received the Informal Admonition from Chief Disciplinary Counsel on October 13, 2011, you are conclusively deemed to have violated the following Rules relating to the underlying representation in the adoption matter: RPC 1.3, 1.4(a)(3), and 3.2.

Please be aware that any subsequent violations of the ethical rules can only result in further discipline and perhaps even more severe sanctions than that imposed today.

Mr. Falcione, the conduct that has brought you to this moment is in the record of this proceeding and is now fully public. This Public Reprimand is now a matter of public record.

As you stand before the Board, we remind you that you have a continuing obligation to adhere to the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement. This Public Reprimand is proof that Pennsylvania lawyers will not be permitted to engage in conduct that falls below professional standards.

This Public Reprimand shall be posted on the Disciplinary Board's website at www.padisciplinaryboard.org.

____________________

Designated Member

The Disciplinary Board of the

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Administered by a designated panel of three Members of The Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, at Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on December 6, 2013.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The undersigned, Respondent in the above proceeding, herewith acknowledges that the above Public Reprimand was administered in his presence and in the presence of the designated panel of The Disciplinary Board at 16th Floor, Seven Penn Center, 1635 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on December 6, 2013.

__________________

Alfred Joseph Falcione


Summaries of

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Falcione

DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
Jul 12, 2013
No. 114 DB 2012 (Pa. Jul. 12, 2013)
Case details for

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Falcione

Case Details

Full title:OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL Petitioner v. ALFRED JOSEPH FALCIONE…

Court:DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Date published: Jul 12, 2013

Citations

No. 114 DB 2012 (Pa. Jul. 12, 2013)

Citing Cases

Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Stroumbakis

Prior discipline cases where an attorney fails to appear for an informal admonition have resulted in…