Dishonest Eastern Shore lawyer disbarred

Listen to this article

Maryland‘s top court on Tuesday unanimously disbarred an Eastern Shore lawyer who had surreptitiously and repeatedly transferred funds from a client escrow account to his law firm’s general fund, telling partners he had earned the money.

Christopher A. Palmer also told partners he had filed lawsuits on behalf of firm clients when he had not, the Court of Appeals stated.

In addition, Palmer — a former vice president of the Worcester County Bar Association — fabricated pleadings to make it appear that he was representing clients adequately, the court added in handing down the legal profession’s ultimate sanction.

“It has long been settled that an attorney’s misappropriation … of funds entrusted to his care, be the amount small or large, is of great concern and represents the gravest form of professional misconduct,” Judge Glenn T. Harrell Jr. wrote for the high court. “Accordingly, when an attorney of the state commits the grievous act of misappropriating funds, particularly when combined with dishonesty or misrepresentation, it will result ‘inevitably’ in disbarment.”

Palmer, who argued his own defense before the court Oct. 12, told the judges he padded the income he was generating and the work he was performing in an effort to make partner at the firm, Ayres, Jenkins, Gordy & Almand PA in Ocean City. The firm fired him in December 2008 after discovering his misconduct.

Palmer, in pressing for the lighter sanction of suspension, submitted letters from prosecutors, a public defender and a private attorney attesting to his character and said neither his clients nor the firm suffered financially due to his actions.

Palmer added he cooperated with Bar Counsel and has received psychological care.

But the court said this “cocktail of mitigating factors” does not alleviate the harm to public confidence caused by his behavior.

“This court has long held that when a member of the bar is shown to be willfully dishonest for personal gain by means of fraud, cheating, or like conduct, absent the most compelling circumstances … disbarment follow[s] as a matter of course,” Harrell wrote.

These compelling circumstances include a showing that the attorney had a “serious and debilitating mental condition” which was the “root cause for [his or her] utter inability to conform his or her conduct in accordance with the law and with the Rules of Professional Conduct,” Harrell added.

Palmer’s psychologist, John T. Zweig, stated in a letter that the attorney had a “blind spot in his personality.”

But the court said this deficiency did not render Palmer incapable of complying with the rules.

The court also rejected Palmer’s request that his sanction be reduced because he had reported his misconduct to Bar Counsel, the Attorney Grievance Commission‘s investigator and prosecutor.

The court said Palmer came forward only after firm partners confronted him about his misconduct.

Harrell added that even an unprovoked admission to Bar Counsel does not necessarily protect an attorney from disbarment.

“Even assuming pure self-reporting, while we suggest that it should be considered by this court in mitigation, we decline to adopt a per se rule of mitigation from disbarment to indefinite suspension in cases involving intentional misappropriation of client funds and intentional dishonesty,” Harrell wrote.

In a concurring opinion, Judge Lynne A. Battaglia lauded Harrell for not foreclosing “the possibility that true self-reporting of misconduct, without having been discovered by others already, possibly may serve as mitigation.”

Battaglia added, “I believe that self-reporting should be encouraged by this court and should be viewed as an important value to emulate.”

Dorchester County Circuit Judge Brett W. Wilson, to whom the court referred the disciplinary case for factual findings, concluded Palmer had transferred to the firm’s general fund a total of $7,000 from the escrow accounts of three clients for whom he had won judgments in June and September 2008.

Because he received one-third of all money he brought into the firm — in addition to his $50,000 salary — Palmer was paid more than $2,333 from these secret transfers. The firm ultimately deducted these ill-gotten gains from his salary after returning the misappropriated funds to the client escrow accounts, Wilson found.

Palmer also lied when he told partners he had filed complaints in collection matters on behalf of three clients, Atlantic Pools & Spas Inc., the Mayor and City Council of Ocean City, and Worcester Preparatory School, Wilson said.

In the Atlantic Pools case, Palmer fabricated complaints and summonses to support his misrepresentations that suits had been filed, the judge added.

Palmer initially lied when partners began to question his work in December 2008. But he ultimately admitted his misconduct that month during a meeting with partners, which he called, Wilson found.

The firm fired him after the meeting. Palmer, who had been with the firm for nine years, sought counseling from Zweig the following month.

The Court of Appeals, in its disbarment decision, said Palmer violated Maryland Rules of Professional Conduct governing competent representation (Rule 1.1); safekeeping client property (Rule 1.15); and misconduct (Rule 8.4). He also violated Maryland Rule 16-609, governing prohibited transactions, and Section 10-306 of the Maryland Business Occupations & Professions Article, by misusing trust money, the court said.

Palmer, most recently a solo practitioner in Berlin, declined to comment.

Bar Counsel Glenn M. Grossman has a policy of not commenting on disciplinary rulings.

WHAT THE COURT HELD

Case:

Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Palmer, CA Misc. Docket AG No. 49, Sept. Term 2009. Reported. Opinion by Harrell, J. Concurrence by Battaglia, J. Filed Nov. 30, 2010.

Issue:

Is disbarment an appropriate sanction for surreptitiously and repeatedly transferring funds from a client escrow account to a law firm’s general fund?

Holding:

Yes. Misappropriation of funds “represents the gravest form of professional misconduct.”

Counsel:

James P. Botluk for petitioner; Christopher A. Palmer for respondent.