Summary
The Maryland Court of Appeals considered disciplinary charges against attorney John Michael Coppola arising from his preparation, notarization, and recording of estate-planning documents bearing the purported signature of an incapacitated client. The hearing judge found violations of Maryland Rule of Professional Conduct 1.2(d) and Rule 8.4(a)-(d), based on assisting conduct that Coppola knew was criminal or fraudulent. The opinion reviews the attorney-client relationships and alleged professional-conduct violations.
Holdings
- Coppola had attorney-client relationships with Elizabeth West and with West's four children because he provided legal advice and performed legal work for them under circumstances demonstrating professional reliance.
- A lawyer violates Rule 1.2(d) by assisting clients in conduct the lawyer knows is criminal or fraudulent, including falsely certifying and recording a deed in public land records.
- Coppola violated Rule 8.4(a), (b), (c), and (d) by assisting in the false execution and filing of estate documents, committing a criminal act reflecting adversely on his fitness, engaging in dishonesty and misrepresentation, and engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.
- Disbarment is the appropriate sanction for Coppola's intentional dishonest conduct because the mitigating circumstances did not constitute the compelling extenuating circumstances required to impose less than disbarment.
Questions Presented
- Whether Coppola violated Maryland Rule of Professional Conduct 1.2(d) by assisting his clients in executing and recording documents that he knew were criminal or fraudulent.
- Whether Coppola violated Maryland Rule 8.4(a), (b), (c), and (d) through his participation in the false execution, notarization, witnessing, and recording of estate-planning documents.
- Whether Coppola's conduct warranted disbarment in light of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (23)
- Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Sapero, 400 Md. 461, 486-87, 929 A.2d 483, 498 (2007)(followed)
- In re Ruffalo, 390 U.S. 544, 550, 88 S. Ct. 1222, 20 L. Ed. 2d 117 (1968)(followed)
- Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Elmendorf, 404 Md. 353, 946 A.2d 542 (2008)(distinguished)
- Attorney Grievance v. Shoup, 410 Md. 462, 979 A.2d 120 (2009)(followed)
- Attorney Grievance v. Brooke, 374 Md. 155, 821 A.2d 414 (2003)(followed)
- Attorney Grievance Commission v. Goodman, 381 Md. 480, 491, 850 A.2d 1157, 1164 (2004)(followed)
- McMillan v. State, 181 Md. App. 298, 335, 956 A.2d 716, 737 (2008)(followed)
- Ayala v. State, 174 Md. App. 647, 677, 923 A.2d 952, 970 (2007)(followed)
- Attorney Grievance v. Marcalus, 414 Md. 501, 522, 996 A.2d 350, 362 (2010)(followed)
- Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Richardson, 350 Md. 354, 368, 712 A.2d 525, 532 (1998)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 23.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…