Opinion
D-15 September Term 2021 086277
09-22-2022
In the MATTER OF Brian LeBon CALPIN, an Attorney at Law (Attorney No. 032252001)
ORDER
The Disciplinary Review Board having filed with the Court its decision in DRB 21-082, concluding on the record certified to the Board pursuant to Rule 1:20-14(f) (default by respondent) that Brian LeBon Calpin of Medford, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 2001, and who has been suspended from the practice of law since January 20, 2020, should be suspended from practice for a period of eighteen months, consecutive to the one-year term of suspension ordered by the Court to be effective May 7, 2020, for violating RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4(b) (failure to keep client reasonably informed and to reply to reasonable requests for information), RPC 1.16(d) (failure to protect a client's interests on termination of the representation and to refund the unearned portion of a fee), RPC 8.1(b) (failure to cooperate with ethics authorities), and RPC 8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice);
And the Disciplinary Review Board having further determined that respondent should be required to refund the fee paid to him in the Homan matter and that following reinstatement to practice, respondent should be required to practice law under supervision;
And Brian LeBon Calpin having failed to appear on the Order directing him to show cause why he should not be disbarred or otherwise disciplined;
And good cause appearing;
It is ORDERED that Brian LeBon Calpin is suspended from the practice of law for a period of eighteen months, effective May 7, 2021, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent shall remain suspended from the practice of law pursuant to the Orders of this Court filed December 20, 2019, and May 7, 2020, and pending his repayment of the fee in the Homan matter, compliance with the determination of the District IIIB Fee Arbitration determination in District Docket No. IIIB-2018-0008F, and payment of the sanction to the Disciplinary Oversight Committee, and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further
ORDERED that on reinstatement to the practice of law, respondent shall practice under the supervision of a practicing attorney approved by the Office of Attorney Ethics for a period of two years and until the further Order of the Court; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent comply with Rule 1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys; and it is further
ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 1:20-20(c), respondent's failure to comply with the Affidavit of Compliance requirement of Rule 1:20-20(b)(15) may (1) preclude the Disciplinary Review Board from considering respondent's petition for reinstatement for a period of up to six months from the date respondent files proof of compliance; (2) be found to constitute a violation of RPC 8.1(b) and RPC 8.4(d) ; and (3) provide a basis for an action for contempt pursuant to Rule 1:10-2; and it is further
ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent's file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further
ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in Rule 1:20-17.