Note: More than 14,800 persons are eligible to practice law in Oregon. Some of them share the same name or similar names. All discipline reports should be read carefully for names, addresses and bar numbers.
Form B Resignation
Effective Oct. 17, 2013, the supreme court accepted the Form B resignation of former Portland attorney Des Connall. At the time of his resignation, Connall was involved in two formal proceedings brought by the bar alleging that he had violated various fee and trust account rules, including RPC 1.5(a) and provisions of RPC 1.15-1 on numerous occasions. In one matter, Connall was charged with a violation of RPC 5.1 for failing to adequately supervise his associate, who mishandled client funds. Both formal complaints also alleged that Connall engaged in misrepresentations (RPC 8.4(a)(3)) and provided incorrect information to the bar (RPC 8.1(a)(1)).
The resignation recited that Portland attorney Wayne Mackeson will be given custody of Connall’s client files.
TERRANCE P. GOUGH
By order dated Sept. 10, 2013, the disciplinary board approved a stipulation for discipline publicly reprimanding Eugene attorney Terrance P. Gough.
Gough was appointed to represent the mother in a juvenile court proceeding in February 2012. Approximately one year later, Gough commenced a sexual relationship with his client and thereafter continued to represent her in the juvenile proceeding for several more months. Gough stipulated that there was a significant risk that his representation would be materially limited by his own personal interest in violation of RPC 1.7(a)(2) and that he engaged in a sexual relationship with a client in violation of RPC 1.8(j). The stipulation recites that Gough acted negligently in failing to ascertain that a sexual relationship with his client could affect his ability to represent her.
ROBERT L. WOLF
Pursuant to a stipulation for discipline approved by the disciplinary board on Oct. 7, 2013, Portland lawyer Robert L. Wolf was publicly reprimanded for violating RPC 3.4(b) (paying compensation to a witness contingent upon the content of the witness’s testimony or the outcome of the case).
The complaint arose from a lawsuit filed against Wolf by a former client who he had represented in 1988. The parties settled this lawsuit in 2009. The settlement agreement, drafted by Wolf and counsel for plaintiff, conditioned the payment of money to Wolf’s former client in part upon her signing an affidavit, drafted by Wolf, that negated an allegation of her complaint. Wolf thereafter used the affidavit in different but related litigation.
In determining the sanction, the disciplinary board considered Wolf’s prior disciplinary offenses arising out of the representation that was the subject of the former client’s lawsuit against him, that he was motivated by personal vindication and that he refused to acknowledge the wrongful nature of his conduct. The disciplinary board also considered Wolf’s cooperative attitude towards the proceedings, the remoteness of prior disciplinary proceedings, the delay in the proceedings, that he consulted with general counsel’s office and that several bar members were willing to attest that Wolf has the reputation for honesty as a lawyer.