From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Statewide Grievance Committee v. Ankerman

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford at Hartford
Jun 5, 2001
2001 Ct. Sup. 7846 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2001)

Opinion

No. CV 00-0802379

June 5, 2001 CT Page 7847


MEMORANDUM OF DECISION


The Statewide Grievance Committee (the Committee) brought the instant presentment against the respondent, William Ankerman, pursuant to Practice Book § 2-47, charging him with misconduct outside of the presence of the court. The Committee alleges that Ankerman violated Rule 1.15(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to safeguard and promptly deliver to the guardians of Elizabeth Forbes funds that Ankerman held in trust on behalf of Elizabeth Forbes. Additionally, the Committee alleges that Ankerman violated Rule 8.4(2) and (3) of the Rules of Professional Conduct by misappropriating a significant amount of funds he was holding in trust on behalf of Elizabeth Forbes.

Rule 1.15(b) of the Rules of Professional Conduct states: "Upon receiving funds or other property in which a client or third person has an interest, a lawyer shall promptly notify the client or third person. Except as stated in this rule or otherwise permitted by law or by agreement with the client, a lawyer shall promptly deliver to the client or third person any funds or other property that the client or third person is entitled to receive and, upon request by the client or third person, shall promptly render a full accounting regarding such property."

Rule 8.4 of the Rules of Professional Conduct states in relevant part that "[i]t is professional misconduct for a lawyer to:
"(2) Commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness;

"(3) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation . . ."

After trial held on January 10, 2001, and oral argument on February 5, 2001, the court finds that the petitioner has proven a violation of all three provisions by clear and convincing evidence.

A hearing will be held as to an appropriate disposition on July 24, 2001, at 2:00 p.m. The parties are hereby ordered to be prepared to address the aggravating and mitigating factors set forth in Sections 9.22 and 9.32. respectively, of the American Bar Association's Standards for Imposing Lawyer's Sanctions. A memorandum will follow that hearing.

Peck, J.


Summaries of

Statewide Grievance Committee v. Ankerman

Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford at Hartford
Jun 5, 2001
2001 Ct. Sup. 7846 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2001)
Case details for

Statewide Grievance Committee v. Ankerman

Case Details

Full title:STATEWIDE GRIEVANCE COMMITTEE v. WILLIAM L. ANKERMAN, ESQ

Court:Connecticut Superior Court, Judicial District of Hartford at Hartford

Date published: Jun 5, 2001

Citations

2001 Ct. Sup. 7846 (Conn. Super. Ct. 2001)

Citing Cases

Disciplinary Counsel v. Ankerman

{¶ 1} This cause is pending before the Supreme Court of Ohio in accordance with the reciprocal discipline…