BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD ANSWERTO COMPLAINT. NOW COMES Respondent, NEIL JORDAN GREENE, by and through his attorneys,

Transcription

1 BEFORE THE HEARING BOARD OF THE ILLINOIS ATTORNEY REGISTRATION NOV AND DISCIPLINARY COMMISSION ATTY REG &DISC COMM In the Matter of: ) NEIL JORDAN GREENE, ) * + n j * ) Commission No PR Attorney-Respondent, \ No ) FILED CHICAGO ANSWERTO COMPLAINT NOW COMES Respondent, NEIL JORDAN GREENE, by and through his attorneys, Thomas P. McGarry and Thomas P. Sukowicz of Hinshaw & Cuibertson LLP, and for his Answer to the Administrator's Complaint, state as follows: 1. At no time during the period stated in this complaint was Respondent licensed to practice law in the State ofindiana. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Paragraph In or about October 2011, Respondent and Franciscan Alliance, Inc. (hereinafter "Franciscan"), a non-profit corporation then operating at leastthirteen hospitals, including eleven in Indiana and two in Illinois, agreed that Respondent would represent Franciscan in obtaining payment for providing medical care to patients who had been injured in accidents. At that time, Franciscan and Respondent agreed that Respondent's fee for handling such matters would be 12 percent of any amount recovered on claims less than $5,000, or 10 percent of any amount recovered on claims in excess of$5,000. Respondentadmits the allegations contained in Paragraph In or about October 2011, Respondent furnished Franciscan with his letterhead, which identified him as a lawyer. Respondent authorized Franciscan to use that letterhead to disseminate letters at the time of discharge to each patient that had been injured in an accident (hereinafter, "discharge letter"). The discharge letter stated: Dear Patient,

2 Your healthcare provider knows that after an accident you would like to focus on your health. To that end, Franciscan Alliance has partnered with us, Law Offices of Neil J. Greene, to help you have insurance pay your hospital bills related to the accident. This service is at no cost to you. We have an experienced team of patient advocates and attorneys who will work with you to gather all accident details and all potential sources of insurance information regarding your patient account related to the accident. This service is at no cost to you. Many hospital bills can be paid by liability insurance companies rather quickly and we strive to accomplish this so that your need to continuously follow up with the properparties is minimized. We can help you best if you can provide basic information regarding yourself, health insurance, auto insurance, liability insurance, worker's compensation insurance, and legal representation. You can easily provide this information to us by speaking to one of our patient advocates at: Thank you. Law Offices ofneil J. Greene Respondent admits theallegations contained in Paragraph The statement in the discharge letter that Franciscan "has partnered" with Respondent "to help [the patient] have insurance pay [the patient's] hospital bills related to the accident" was misleading in that Respondent was only representing Franciscan in obtained payments for medical care, and he was not representing the interests of Franciscan's patients. The allegations contained in Paragraph 4 consist of an opinion about the characterization of words contained in the discharge letter, and therefore, Respondent denies the allegations contained in Paragraph The statement in the discharge letterthat, "[t]his service is at no cost to you," was misleading because it implied that Respondent was offering the patients a service, and that the service was one for which he would normally charge the patients a fee, even though Respondent was representing only Franciscan and not the patients I3vl 1311

3 The allegations contained in Paragraph 5 consist of an opinion about the characterization of words contained in the discharge letter, and therefore, Respondent denies the allegations contained in Paragraph Between October 2011 and mid-november 2011, Franciscan, with Respondent's authorization, hand-delivered hundreds of copies of the discharge letterto patients at the time of their discharge from Franciscan's Indiana hospitals. Respondent admits the allegations contained in Paragraph The discharge letter, on Respondent's letterhead, contained no indication of Respondent's lack of licensure to practice law in Indiana and held Respondent out as a lawyer authorized to provide legal services in that State. Respondent admits that the discharge letter contained no indication of Respondent's lack of licensure to practice law in Indiana, but denies the remaining allegations of Paragraph 7, including the allegation that Respondent held himself out as a lawyer authorized to provide legal services in that State, Respondent further answers that the discharge letter does not ask or suggest that any patient who receives the letter retain Respondent for any purpose or offer to provide any legal services to any patient. 8. On April 16, 2014, as a result of his use of the discharge letter on behalf of Franciscan in Indiana, the Indiana Supreme Court disciplined Respondent. With the agreement of Respondent, the Indiana Supreme Court found that Respondent had violated Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct Dealing with Unrepresented Parties, Rule 5.5(a) - Unauthorized Practice of Law, and Rule Making a False or Misleading Communication about the Lawyer's Services. In the Matter ofneil.jordan Greene, Indiana Supreme Court case number 98S DI-166 (April 16,2014). Respondent denies the allegation contained in Paragraph 8 that he was disciplined by the Indiana Supreme Court. In the Indiana proceedings, although Respondent admitted to have violated the rules of professional conduct identified in Paragraph 8 of the Complaint, he was not disciplined under Rule 23 of the Rules for Admission to the Bar and the Discipline of Attorneys of the Indiana Rules of Court. Instead, Respondent entered into an agreed Injunctive Order. An Injunctive Order is not a disciplinary sanction. Rule 23 of the Rules

4 for Admission to the Bar and the Discipline ofattorneys ofthe Indiana Rules ofcourt provides in Section 3, Types of Discipline and Suspension, in pertinent part: (a) One of the following types of discipline may be imposed upon any attorney found guilty of misconduct: - permanent disbarment from the practice oflaw; - suspension for a definite or an indefinite period from the practice of law subject to reinstatement as hereinafter provided; - suspension for a definite period, not to exceed six (6) months, from the practice of law with provision for automatic reinstatement upon such conditions as the Courtshall specify in the order of suspension; - a public reprimand; - a private reprimand; or - a private administrative admonition. (c) In cases of misconduct or disability, this Court may, in lieu of permanent disbarment or suspension, place an attorney on probation and permitsuchattorney to continue practicing law if in its opinion such action is appropriate and desirable. Rule 23 contains the exclusive and exhaustive list of the types of disciplinary sanctions, and an injunction is not included as one of the disciplinary sanctions. None of the disciplinary sanctions listed in Rule 23 was imposed on Respondent, so he cannot be said to have been "disciplined." 9. By reason of the conduct described above, Respondent has engaged in the following misconduct: (a) (b) Practicing law in a jurisdiction where doing so violates the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction, in violation of Rule 5.5(a) of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, by handling matters for Franciscan in Indiana and authorizing Franciscan to distribute discharge letters from its Indiana hospitals,wherein Respondent held himself out as an attorney; Making a false or misleading communication about his services, in violation of Rule 7.1 of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct, by leading Franciscan patients to believe that he was licensed to practice law in Indiana, and by leading them to believe that he was working on their behalfto have their medical bills paid by insurance.

5 Respondent denies the allegations of Paragraph 9, and each and every of them, including sub-paragraphs a and b. WHEREFORE, Respondent, Neil Jordan Greene, requests that this Complaint against him be dismissed, that no discipline be imposed against him, and for such further reliefas may be just and equitable. PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND Pursuant to Commission Rule 231, Respondent states that he was licensed to practice law in the State of Illinois on November 6, 1986, and in no other state court, federal court or administrative agency. Thomas P. McGarry Thomas P. Sukowicz Hinshaw & Cuibertson LLP 222 North LaSalle, Suite 300 Chicago, IL Tel Fac Respectfully Submitted One(o ihe Attorneys for Respondei Neil Jordan Greene