Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of North Dakota v. Chinquist

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court reviewed disciplinary findings against attorney C. Charles Chinquist concerning unreasonable and undocumented fees, mishandling of client funds, an undisclosed financial transaction with a client, and a sexual relationship with a domestic-relations client. The court found clear and convincing violations of North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct 1.5(a) and (b), 1.7(a), 1.8(a), and 1.15(a) and (f). It increased the recommended sanction to a six-month-and-one-day suspension and ordered payment of $5,289.45 in disciplinary costs and expenses.

Holdings

1. Chinquist violated N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.15(a) and (f) by accepting client payments without accounting or billing statements, failing to determine what portion of the funds remained unearned, failing to maintain required records, and failing to deposit the payments into a trust account.
2. Chinquist violated N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.5(a) and (b) by accepting large sums without documentation or accounting, accepting amounts bearing no apparent relationship to the work performed, and failing to communicate the basis, rate, or amount of fees.
3. Chinquist violated N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.8(a) by accepting $5,000 from the woman for another client's legal fees without advising her to seek independent counsel before consenting to the transaction.
4. A lawyer violates N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.7(a) by engaging in a sexual relationship with a client during representation in a domestic-relations matter because the lawyer's own interests create an inherent conflict with the client's interests, even absent proof of actual impairment and even though the rules did not then contain an express prohibition.
5. A six-month-and-one-day suspension and assessment of the full disciplinary costs were warranted by the combination of client-fund violations, fee violations, the undisclosed financial transaction, and the conflict created by the sexual relationship, together with aggravating and mitigating factors.

Questions Presented

1. Whether clear and convincing evidence established violations of North Dakota Rules of Professional Conduct 1.15(a) and (f) concerning safekeeping client property and maintenance of records.
2. Whether clear and convincing evidence established violations of Rules 1.5(a) and (b) concerning the reasonableness and communication of attorney fees.
3. Whether Chinquist violated Rule 1.8(a) by entering into a financial transaction with a client without advising her to seek independent counsel.
4. Whether Chinquist violated Rule 1.7(a) by engaging in a sexual relationship with a domestic-relations client during the representation.
5. What sanction was appropriate in light of the violations and aggravating and mitigating circumstances.

Disposition

other