The Law Society of Saskatchewan. STEVEN J. WILSON November 23, 2011 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Wilson, 2011 SKLSS 8

Similar documents
The Law Society of Saskatchewan. WILLIAM T. JOHNSTON November 22, 2011 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Johnston, 2011 SKLSS 7

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. DWAYNE JAMES STONECHILD September 30, 2013 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Stonechild, 2013 SKLSS 8

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. MURRAY THOMAS TRUNKS October 28, 2013 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Trunks, 2013 SKLSS 11

ANNE ELIZABETH HARDY NOVEMBER 1, 2011 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Anne Elizabeth Hardy, 2011 LSS 6

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

SAMUEL H. MCCULLOUGH MAY 18, 2011 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Samuel H. McCullough, 2011 LSS 1

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. BRADLEY DAVID TILLING November 29, 2013 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Tilling, 2013 SKLSS 12

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. ALBERT JOSEPH ANGUS August 31, 2010 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Angus, 2010 LSS 6

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. WILLIAM ROYDEN HOWE November 13, 2012 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Howe, 2012 SKLSS 8

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

The Law Society of Saskatchewan Discipline Decision regarding Drew Ronald Filyk of Regina, Saskatchewan

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

The Law Society of Alberta Hearing Committee Report

IN THE MATTER OF THE PSYCHOLOGISTS ACT, 1997, AMENDED 2004, AND BYLAWS AND IN THE MATTER OF A COMPLAINT AGAINST GINA KEMPTON-DOANE

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. BRENDA ANNE WALPER-BOSSENCE July 6, 2011 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Walper-Bossence, 2011 SKLSS 4

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. KRISHAN KUMAR April 11, 2013 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Kumar 2013 SKLSS 4

Krishan Kumar. The Law Society of Saskatchewan

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA. IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT, RSA 2000, c L-8, - and -

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT, 1990 AND IN THE MATTER OF William Zion Brown, of La Ronge, Saskatchewan, A LAWYER

CONSENT. DATED at the of, in the Province of (City or Town) (name of City/Town) Saskatchewan, this day of, 20. Signature of Solicitor {

IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF MARK PAIDRA, A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA

REPORT OF THE HEARING COMMITTEE

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF R.

REASONS FOR DECISION. 3. The notice to solicitor referenced two citations, namely that:

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/27/ :11 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2018

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

REPORT OF THE HEARING COMMITTEE

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND

Schedule of Forms. Rule No. Form No. Source

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND

IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSIONS ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF MARK FEEHAN, A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT

SUPREME COURT - NASSAU COUNTY - IAS PART 56 PART RULES & PROCEDURES

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF RYAN MCCALL, A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY

The Law Society of British Columbia In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c.9 and a hearing concerning. James Douglas Hall.

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU -PART 47

PRACTICE DIRECTIVES FOR CONTESTED APPLICATIONS IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF MANITOBA

The Law Society of Alberta Hearing Committee Report

FORM 11 (Rule 81) Admission Application, Questionnaire & Undertaking

LAW SOCIETY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA SAMPLE QUALIFICATION EXAMINATION PART II ANSWER GUIDE

NOVA SCOTIA BARRISTERS SOCIETY HEARING PANEL Citation: Nova Scotia Barristers Society v. MacIsaac, 2001 NSBS 6

Kit #5 Variation of Custody/Access Self-Help Kit*

REASONS FOR DECISION OF PAUL MOREAU MEMBER HEARING SEPTEMBER 26 AND NOVEMBER 8, 2006

Article IX DISCIPLINE By-Law and Manual of Procedure

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND

Effective January 1, 2016

The Law Society of Saskatchewan

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT. IN THE MATTER OF the Legal Profession Act (the LPA ); and

The Law Society of British Columbia In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c.9 and a hearing concerning. Clayton Bruce Williams

The Law Society of Saskatchewan. ROBERT LOUIS STEVENSON November 20, 2013 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Stevenson, 2013 SKLSS 9

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF KEITH SHUSTOV,

Re Rao. The Dealer Member Rules of the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada (IIROC)

NOVA SCOTIA BARRISTERS SOCIETY HEARING PANEL Citation: Nova Scotia Barristers Society v. Savoie, 2005 NSBS 6

Labour Court Rules, 2006 ARRANGEMENT OF RULES PART I

SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA NO B-1208 IN RE: DOUGLAS KENT HALL ATTORNEY DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDING

All applications for the Domestic GAL List and the Juvenile Appointment List must be accompanied by:

All applications for the Domestic GAL List and the Juvenile Appointment List must be accompanied by:

FAMILY COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU - PART 8

INFORMATION NOTICE. Detention Review Hearings pursuant to s. 525 of the Criminal Code

LOCAL RULES of the COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CLARION COUNTY

REPORT OF THE HEARING COMMITTEE

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT

IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSIONS ACT AND IN THE MATTER OF A HEARING REGARDING THE CONDUCT OF ANAND SARA, A MEMBER OF THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA

Steven M. Mezrow, you stand before the Disciplinary Board, your

IN THE MATTER of WELLINGTON STANDARDS COMMITTEE (No. 1) IN THE MATTER of JEREMY JAMES McGUIRE, Barrister and Solicitor

***FOR BACKGROUND CHECK ONLY***

Alberta Human Rights Commission. Bylaws. Pursuant to section 17(1) of the. Alberta Human Rights Act

The Law Society of British Columbia In the matter of the Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c.9 and a hearing concerning. Gary Russell Vlug.

BOTH SIGNATURES MUST BE IN BLUE INK

Protocol for Judge Leo Bowman

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA HEARING COMMITTEE REPORT

LAW SOCIETY OF ALBERTA IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT; AND

court of appeal rules

City Province Country Postal Code

CIVIL PRACTICE DIRECTIVE #5 APPLICATIONS UNDER THE SASKATCHEWAN HUMAN RIGHTS CODE

Proposed Rules for First Reading page 2. Rule 4.3 Withdrawal page 2. Rule 5.1 Prompt Completion page 5

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 113,200. In the Matter of LARRY D. EHRLICH, Respondent. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN DISCIPLINE

Relevant Excerpts of the Rules of the City of New York Title 61 - Office of Collective Bargaining Chapter 1 - Practice and Procedure

APPENDIX A Affidavit in Support of Application to Resign While Proceeding or Investigation is Pending INSTRUCTIONS An application pursuant to section

[SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) ARE UNCHANGED]

PART RULES HONORABLE MARIA G. ROSA New York State Supreme Court Dutchess County Supreme Court 10 Market Street Poughkeepsie, New York 12601

PRACTICE DIRECTIVE I Preliminary Inquiry. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada regarding Preliminary Inquiries came into force on June 1, 2004.

WE CAN NOT/WILL NOT CONTACT YOU!

Discipline Committee Rules

Tennessee Athlete Agent Application for Registration or Renewal

LEWIS A. KAPLAN United States District Judge United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007

IN THE MATTER OF THE INSURANCE ACT, R.S.O. 1990, c. I. 8, SECTION 268 and REGULATION 283/95

EMPLOYMENT COURT PRACTICE DIRECTIONS October 2016

Purpose of Mandatory Fee Arbitration

Rules 1.9, 1.9A (New Rule), and 2.1 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i

PORTAGE la PRAIRIE RESOLUTION DOCKET PROTOCOL ADULT CHARGES

Transcription:

1 The Law Society of Saskatchewan STEVEN J. WILSON November 23, 2011 Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Wilson, 2011 SKLSS 8 IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION ACT, 1990 AND IN THE MATTER OF STEVEN J. WILSON, A LAWYER OF SASKATOON, SASKATCHEWAN DECISION OF THE HEARING COMMITTEE FOR THE LAW SOCIETY OF SASKATCHEWAN 1. The Hearing Committee in this matter was comprised of Thomas Healey, Dr. Greg Stevens, and William Davern. The Hearing took place, via telephone, on November 23, 2011. Counsel for the Law Society of Saskatchewan (L.S.S.) was Timothy Huber and Steven Wilson was represented by Karen Prisciak, Q.C. 2. During the Hearing, by consent, a document entitled Agreed Statement of Facts was filed as Exhibit P1 and a document entitled Certificate of the Executive Director of the Law Society of Saskatchewan Pursuant to Section 83 of the Legal Profession Act was filed as Exhibit P2. At the outset of the Hearing, as noted in P1, Agreed Statement of Facts, counsel for the L.S.S. and the Member acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Hearing Committee and agreed that neither of them had any preliminary applications or objections in relation to the Hearing Committee. In relation to the Formal Complaint, the Member entered a guilty plea to count #1 and #3 and the L.S.S. withdrew count #2. Thus the Member admitted: a. In count #1 that he did fail to serve his client in a conscientious, diligent and efficient manner in that he failed to inform his client of pending court dates; and b. In count #3 that he did offer to reduce his legal account to his client in exchange for a written agreement from his client not to proceed with a complaint to the Law Society. 3. Counsel for the L.S.S. also filed with the Committee two prior Discipline Decisions that had been issued by the L.S.S. in relation to Steven Wilson, identified as Discipline Decision #04-06 and Discipline Decision #07-04 and a decision for reference entitled Law Society of Saskatchewan v. Segal [1999] L.S.D.D. No 20.

2 4. During the hearing, Timothy Huber on behalf of the L.S.S. and Karen Prisciak, Q.C., on behalf of the Member jointly submitted to the Hearing Committee that in this case, the Member should be: a. reprimanded; b. ordered to pay a fine in the amount of $2,200.00; and c. required to pay costs in the amount of $1,435.00. 5. In considering a joint submission, the Hearing Committee was cognizant that a Hearing Committee has a duty to consider a joint submission and should accept the recommended submission unless it is not within the range of sentencing options. (see: Rault v. Law Society of Saskatchewan 2009 SKCA 81; and Law Society of Manitoba v. MacIver, [2003] L.S.D.D. No. 29). 6. In this case, with some reluctance, the Hearing Committee is prepared to accept the joint submission. The Hearing Committee is of the view that the joint submission is within the range of acceptable sentencing options available to the committee. Our reluctance arose as this is now the third time that this Member has been disciplined by the L.S.S. and as the proposed penalty does not include any formal steps or requirements that require the Member to complete some training or mentoring program which might assist him in avoiding similar mistakes in the future. However, we were assured by Karen Prisciak, Q.C., that a number of steps have already been taken by the Member and that it is expected that those steps will assist the Member in practicing law in compliance with all of the requirements of the L.S.S. in the future. 7. In relation to this matter, the Hearing Committee Orders that: a. the Member Steven John Wilson be reprimanded; b. the Member Steven John Wilson be required to pay a fine in the amount of $2,200.00; and c. the Member Steven John Wilson be required to pay costs in the amount of $1,435.00. 8. At the request of the Member, the Hearing Committee agrees that the Member will have until May 23, 2012 to pay the fine and costs set out above. AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS AND ADMISSIONS In relation to the Formal Complaint dated March 14th, 2011, alleging that he: 1. Did fail to serve his client, J.C. in a conscientious, diligent and efficient manner in that he failed to inform J.C. of pending court dates; 2. Did fail to serve his client, J.C. in a conscientious, diligent and efficient manner in that he failed to inform J.C. of a decision of the Court within a reasonable time; and

3 3. Did offer to reduce his legal account to J.C. in exchange for a written agreement from J.C. not to proceed with a complaint to the Law Society. JURISDICTION 1. Steven John Wilson (hereinafter the Member ) is, and was at all times material to this proceeding, a practicing member of the Law Society of Saskatchewan (hereinafter the Law Society ), and accordingly is subject to the provisions of the Legal Profession Act, 1990 (herein after the Act ) as well as the Rules of the Law Society of Saskatchewan (the Rules ). Attached at Tab 1 is a Certificate of the Executive Director of the Law Society of Saskatchewan pursuant to section 83 of the Act confirming the Member s practicing status. 2. The Member is currently the subject of a Formal Complaint initiated by the Law Society dated March 14th, 2011. The Formal Complaint is comprised of the three allegations noted above. The Formal Complaint was served upon the Member on March 22, 2011. 3. The Member acknowledges the jurisdiction of the Hearing Committee appointed in relation to this matter to determine whether the complaint against him is well founded. The Member further acknowledges the service of the Formal Complaint and the Notice of Hearing and takes no issue with the constitution of the Hearing Committee. 4. The Member has agreed to enter a guilty plea in relation to allegations #1 and #3. The Investigation Committee agrees to withdraw allegation #2. BACKGROUND 5. The Member was retained by J.C. in July, 2008, in relation to a family law matter. In February, 2009 the Member commenced a petition for divorce on behalf of his client. 6. J.C. s estranged spouse C.C. subsequently replied with an application for child and spousal support under the provisions of The Inter-jurisdictional Support Orders Act, S.S. 2002, c.i-10.03 ( ISO ), within which the applicant sought orders under the ISO for child support in the amount of $260.00 per month retroactive to September, 2003 as well as, spousal support of $100.00 per month retroactive to February, 2004. 7. J.C. advised the Member that he had never signed the Minutes of Settlement that were submitted to the Court by C.C. in support of her position. PARTICULARS OF CONDUCT 8. The Law Society received a Letter of Complaint from J.C. dated February 10, 2010. The letter contained numerous allegations against the Member including that the Member failed to notify him of pending court dates and offered to release J.C. s files at no charge provided that J.C. sign a written statement that he would not file a complaint against him with the Law Society.

4 Failure to Notify of Pending Court Date 9. On August 17, 2009, an application made by C.C. matter was adjourned to August 31, 2009. On August 31, 2009, the Member argued his client s position before the Court. The Member filed an Affidavit with the Court supporting J.C. s assertion that J.C. had not signed the Minutes of Settlement. The Court did not accept this argument. 10. J.C. was unaware of the August 31st court date and as a result, J.C. did not attend. He was upset that the Member had not told him about this upcoming appearance. 11. On August 31, 2009 the Member sent a letter to J.C. briefly summing up the outcome of the Chambers proceedings. Firstly, he stated that the Judge rejected the contention about the signature. Secondly, he reported the judge s determination that J.C. owed C.C. money and the extent of the retroactivity. Thirdly, the Member explained that the Court required more details concerning the dependency status of the child. 12. In the August 31, 2009 letter from the Member to J.C., the Member also conveyed his doubts as to the validity of J.C. s position that he had not signed the Minutes of Settlement and explained that he had considered withdrawing himself from the file due to his concern that they may have been misleading the Court. The Member further advised J.C. that once he received the exact wording of the Order, he would let him know. 13. As a result of the above events, specifically the Member s lack of confidence in J.C. s position, J.C. retained new counsel, G.R., to act on his behalf. On September 2, 2009 the Member received a request from G.R. asking that the Member provide the file to J.C. for transfer. 14. On September 4, 2009 the Member advised G.R. that he received a copy of the Judge s Order and that he would provide the document once J.C. s account was settled. The amount of the invoice was $1,941.00. 15. The Judge s Order was issued on September 2, 2009 directing that the matter was to be adjourned to Chambers on November 9, 2009. In addition to directing J.C. to pay child support, the Order directed C.C. to provide the Court with a sworn affidavit as to the status of the child. Based upon the Affidavit evidence to be presented at Chambers on November 9, 2009 by C.C., the Court would then determine whether the amount ordered would be sufficient to cover the retroactive amount awarded by the Court. 16. J.C. did not become aware of the November 9, 2009 adjourn date until 51 days after the Member became aware of it when on October 23, 2009, the Member sent J.C. a copy of the Order.

5 Attempt to Bargain out of the J.C. s Complaint to the Law Society 17. On November 2, 2009 J.C. sent the Member a letter of termination and directed him to return all of his documents. Reasons for termination included the Member s delay in notifying J.C. of the pending November 9, 2009 Court date. 18. The Member s account was still outstanding and on November 4, 2009, the Member advised J.C. that he would be willing to release the file for $330.00. 19. On November 25, 2009 the Member faxed a copy of the September 4, 2009 letter to G.R. with a hand-written note requesting that she call him. In a phone conversation later that day, the Member inquired as to whether J.C. was going to file a complaint with the Law Society. She advised the Member that J.C. was considering filing a complaint. In response, the Member told G.R. that he would release the files at no charge if J.C. would sign a statement to the effect that he would not file a complaint with the Law Society. When informed about this offer, J.C. refused. On November 26, 2009 G.R. called the Member to inform him of J.C. s refusal to accept. The Member has admitted to the substance of this discussion as related to the Law Society by G.R. 20. Shortly after being advised of the Member s offer, J.C. decided to proceed with his complaint to the Law Society. PRIOR RECORD 21. The Member has two prior findings of conduct unbecoming from 2004 and 2007. The decisions are attached hereto at Tab 2 for the committee s reference.