DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS
Contact the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel at (512) 453-5535, the Board of Disciplinary Appeals at (512) 475-1578 or txboda.org, or the State Commission on Judicial Conduct at (512) 463-5533.
REINSTATEMENTS
George R. Neely [#14861750], 66, of Houston, will be filing a petition in the District Courts of Texas for reinstatement as a member of the State Bar of Texas.
DISBARMENTS
On June 7, 2016, Richard Bradley Dunn [#24049543],
41, of Dallas, was disbarred. An evidentiary panel of the District 6
Grievance Committee found that after complaints were filed against Dunn
by two former clients in unrelated legal matters, Dunn failed to timely
furnish a response or other information, with regard to each complaint,
to the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel as required by the Texas
Rules of Disciplinary Procedure. Dunn did not in good faith timely
assert a privilege or other legal ground for his failure to do so in
either matter.
Dunn violated Rule 8.04(a)(8). He was ordered to pay $4,272.50 in
attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On April 13, 2016, Arthur Grimaldo Jr. [#24002186],
48, of Corinth, was disbarred. An evidentiary panel of the District 14
Grievance Committee found that Grimaldo collected investor funds and
used the money for his benefit; failed to promptly deliver the funds to
his client upon request; failed to keep the funds separate from his own
funds; made a false statement of material fact in connection with a
disciplinary matter; engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud,
deceit, or misrepresentation; and committed egregious fraud throughout
the representation of his client.
Grimaldo violated Rules 1.03(a), 1.14(a), 1.14(b), 1.14(c), 8.01(a), and
8.04(a)(3). He was ordered to pay $199,000 in restitution and $3,368.50
in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On June 2, 2016, Richard C. Jaramillo [#10573200],
69, of Dallas, was disbarred. An evidentiary panel of the District 6
Grievance Committee found that on January 28, 2014, the complainant
hired Jaramillo to represent her in a personal injury matter. Jaramillo
failed to keep the complainant reasonably informed about the status of
her personal injury matter and failed to promptly comply with reasonable
requests for information from the complainant about her personal injury
matter. Jaramillo failed to hold funds belonging in whole or in part to
the complainant separate from his own property and failed to keep the
complainant’s funds in a separate trust account. Upon receiving funds in
which the complainant and her medical providers had an interest,
Jaramillo failed to promptly notify the complainant and her medical
providers and failed to promptly deliver to the complainant and her
medical providers funds that they were entitled to receive. Jaramillo
engaged in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation.
Jaramillo violated Rules 1.03(a), 1.14(a), 1.14(b), and 8.04(a)(3). He
was ordered to pay $115,000 in restitution and $2,618.75 in attorneys’
fees and direct expenses.
SUSPENSIONS
On June 20, 2016, Arthur David Courtade [#04891000],
69, of Fort Worth, agreed to a fully probated six-month suspension
effective June 15, 2016. An evidentiary panel of the District 7
Grievance Committee found that Courtade appeared for a district court
hearing in Louisiana on behalf of a client without having a license to
practice law in Louisiana or obtaining permission to appear in court pro
hac vice.
Courtade violated Rule 5.05(a). He was ordered to pay $1,140 in
attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On May 3, 2016, Norman A. Desmarais Jr.
[#00795925], 66, of Nederland, received a one-year fully probated
suspension effective June 1, 2016. An evidentiary panel of the District
3 Grievance Committee found that Desmarais neglected his client’s legal
matter and, upon termination of his representation, failed to refund
advance payments of fees that had not been earned. Desmarais further
failed to timely furnish his response to the grievance filed with the
Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, and he did not in good faith
assert a privilege or other legal ground for his failure to do so.
Desmarais violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.15(d), and 8.04(a)(8). He was
ordered to pay $350 in restitution and $1,520 in attorneys’ fees and
direct expenses.
On June 13, 2016, Brian Anthony Hamner [#24041050],
40, of San Antonio, agreed to a three-year partially probated suspension
with the first 16 months actively served and the remainder probated. The
District 10 Grievance Committee found that Hamner neglected client
matters, failed to communicate with clients, failed to refund unearned
fees, failed to respond to grievances, and engaged in the practice of
law while his license was suspended.
Hamner violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.03(a), 1.15(d), 8.04(a)(8), and
8.04(a)(11). He was ordered to pay $2,250 in restitution and $1,000 in
attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On June 7, 2016, William Eric Hulett [#00796797],
51, of Dallas, received a 24-month partially probated suspension
effective August 1, 2016, with 10 months active and the remainder
probated. An evidentiary panel of the District 6 Grievance Committee
found that in representing a client in her divorce proceeding, Hulett
neglected the legal matter entrusted to him. Hulett failed to keep
clients reasonably informed about the status of their divorce
proceedings and failed to promptly comply with reasonable requests for
information from his clients. Upon termination of representation, Hulett
failed to refund advance payments of fees that had not been earned.
Hulett further failed to timely furnish his responses to the grievances
filed with the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel, and he did not in
good faith assert a privilege or other legal ground for his failure to
do so.
Hulett violated Rules 1.01(b), 1.03(a), 1.15(d), and 8.04(a)(8). He was
ordered to pay $1,500 in restitution and $1,600 in attorneys’ fees and
direct expenses.
On June 1, 2016, Jana L. Hunsicker [#24000244], 51,
of Georgetown, accepted an 18-month probated suspension effective June
1, 2016. An evidentiary panel of the District 8 Grievance Committee
found that Hunsicker was lead prosecutor in a capital murder case. The
state provided defense counsel a DVD containing surveillance footage
from the crime scene. The defense requested a time-stamped version of
the DVD, but Hunsicker represented that the DVD did not contain time
stamps. Later, during the trial, the state played the DVD for the jury
with a type of player that was able to display the time stamps. The
defense objected, and the trial court granted a mistrial. In his later
findings of fact and conclusions of law, the judge found that Hunsicker
“affirmatively stated to the defense that a time-stamped copy of the
video did not exist and did not correct that statement when she learned
otherwise.” Hunsicker disputed the correctness of those findings, and
the state contended that the time stamps were inculpatory, not
exculpatory, of the defendant.
On April 9, 2015, the court signed a written gag order in the case. On
May 6, 2015, Hunsicker sent an email to the trial judge informing him
that she intended to make statements to the Austin
American-Statesman defending her actions in the case. Thereafter,
in violation of the gag order, Hunsicker made statements about the case
to the newspaper, which were published in an article on May 7, 2015.
The defense filed an application for pretrial writ of habeas corpus.
The trial court held a hearing with live testimony and entered findings
of fact and conclusions of law. Hunsicker filed written objections to
the findings of fact and conclusions of law wherein she stated that the
judge had improperly sealed his own divorce case to protect his
political career. She further accused the judge of lying in the
fact-findings and stated that if he refused to correct the lies, she
would seek sanctions against him with the State Commission on Judicial
Conduct and investigate him for aggravated perjury.
Hunsicker violated Rules 3.04(d), 4.01(a), 8.02(a), and 8.04(a)(3). She
was ordered to pay $3,250 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses and to
complete six additional hours of CLE in the area of ethics.
On June 7, 2016, Richard C. Jaramillo [#10573200],
69, of Dallas, received a three-year partially probated suspension
effective July 1, 2016, with the first year actively suspended and the
remainder probated. An evidentiary panel of the District 6 Grievance
Committee found that in representing the complainant, Jaramillo failed
to notify the complainant about his receipt of her settlement check. In
addition, he failed to safeguard the complainant’s settlement funds by
keeping them separate from his own funds and depositing and maintaining
them in a trust account.
Jaramillo violated Rules 1.14(a) and 1.14(b). He was ordered to pay
$2,357.50 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On June 28, 2016, James L. Mitchell [#14214100],
64, of San Antonio, accepted an 18-month fully probated suspension
effective July 1, 2016. The District 10 Grievance Committee found that
Mitchell neglected a client matter, failed to carry out the obligations
owed to a client, failed to keep a client reasonably informed, and
engaged in conduct involving misrepresentation.
Mitchell violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.01(b)(2), 1.03(a), 1.03(b), and
8.04(a)(3). He was ordered to pay $1,250 in restitution and $1,800 in
attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On June 7, 2016, Tamer Farouk Morsi [#24041530],
43, of San Antonio, accepted a six-month fully probated suspension
effective June 1, 2016. The District 10 Grievance Committee found that
Morsi neglected client matters, failed to communicate with clients,
failed to refund unearned fees, and failed to respond to a
grievance.
Morsi violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.03(a), 1.15(d), and 8.04(a)(8). He
was ordered to pay $1,200 in restitution and $800 in attorneys’
fees.
On June 6, 2016, James Michael O’Briant
[#00788875], 56, of Midland, agreed to a two-year partially probated
suspension effective May 23, 2016, with the first five months and 23
days actively served and the remainder probated. The District 16
Grievance Committee found that O’Briant failed to explain a matter to
the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed
decisions.
O’Briant violated Rule 1.03(b). He was ordered to pay $800 in attorneys’
fees and direct expenses.
On June 28, 2016, Jo Ann San Miguel [#24039153],
41, of Lampasas, accepted a two-year fully probated suspension effective
July 1, 2016. The District 15 Grievance Committee found that San Miguel
failed to hold funds separate from her own property, failed to promptly
deliver funds to a third party, and failed to keep disputed funds in a
trust account until the dispute was resolved.
San Miguel violated Rules 1.14(a), 1.14(b), and 1.14(c). She was ordered
to pay $1,250 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On May 9, 2016, Sydney Marmion Weaver [#00795712],
63, of Odessa, received a 12-month partially probated suspension
effective July 1, 2016, with the first six months actively served and
the remainder probated. The District 15 Grievance Committee found that
Weaver neglected a client matter, failed to keep a client reasonably
informed, failed to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary
to permit a client to make informed decisions, and failed to respond to
the grievance.
Weaver violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.03(a)(b), and 8.04(a)(8). She was
ordered to pay $1,920 in restitution and $3,375 in attorneys’ fees and
direct expenses.
On June 10, 2016, Paul Kobbe Williams [#21566400],
60, of Midland, accepted a one-year fully probated suspension effective
May 23, 2016. The District 16 Grievance Committee found that Williams
failed to keep a client reasonably informed.
Williams violated Rule 1.03(a). He was ordered to pay $800 in
attorneys’ fees.
On June 8, 2016, Richard R. Alamia [#00964200], 69,
of Edinburg, received a two-year fully probated suspension effective
July 1, 2016. The District 12 Grievance Committee found that Alamia
neglected a client matter, failed to keep a client reasonably informed,
and failed to hold client funds separate from his own property.
Alamia violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.03(a), and 1.14(a). He was ordered
to pay $2,500 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On July 25, 2016, Jeremiah David Canady [#24055254],
36, of Houston, accepted a two-year partially probated suspension
effective October 1, 2016, with the first six months actively suspended
and the remainder probated. An evidentiary panel of the District 4
Grievance Committee found that in three separate matters Canady
neglected the legal matter entrusted to him, failed to keep his client
reasonably informed about the status of the case, and failed, upon
termination, to refund advance payments of fees that had not been
earned.
Canady violated Rules 1.01(b)(1), 1.03(a), and 1.15(d). He was ordered
to pay $3,268 in restitution and $1,000 in attorneys’ fees and direct
expenses.
PUBLIC REPRIMANDS
On May 6, 2016, Travis Aaron Eaton [#24080870], 30,
of Houston, received a public reprimand. An evidentiary panel of the
District 4 Grievance Committee found that Eaton neglected a legal matter
and, upon termination of his representation, failed to refund advance
payments of fees that had not been earned.
Eaton violated Rules 1.01(b)(1) and 1.15(d). He was ordered to pay
$2,500 in restitution and $1,450 in attorneys’ fees and direct
expenses.
On May 3, 2016, Norman H. Ewert [#06754500], 67, of
Mesquite, received an agreed judgment of public reprimand. An
evidentiary panel of the District 6 Grievance Committee found that in
representing the complainant in connection with a real estate matter,
Ewert neglected the legal matter entrusted to him. Ewert had direct
supervisory authority over his non-lawyer assistant and failed to make
reasonable efforts to ensure that her conduct was compatible with the
professional obligations of Ewert.
Ewert violated Rules 1.01(b)(1) and 5.03. He was ordered to pay $1,125
in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On May 6, 2016, S. Bruce Hiran [#00785965], 56, of
Houston, accepted an agreed judgment of public reprimand. An evidentiary
panel of the District 4 Grievance Committee found that upon receipt of
settlement funds, Hiran failed to promptly deliver a portion of the
funds, as directed by his clients, to the medical providers who had
treated them for their injuries.
Hiran violated Rule 1.14(b). He was ordered to pay $1,000 in attorneys’
fees and direct expenses.
On May 24, 2016, Terence A. Russell [#17437070],
61, of Hillsboro, agreed to a public reprimand. The District 7 Grievance
Committee found that during the representation of his client in a
criminal matter, Russell failed to explain the matter to the extent
reasonably necessary to permit his client to make informed decisions
regarding the representation and failed to keep his client’s funds
separate from his own property.
Russell violated Rules 1.03(b) and 1.14(a). He was ordered to pay
$1,200 in attorneys’ fees and direct expenses.
On June 16, 2016, Marshall A. Shelsy [#18196300], 65,
of Houston, received an agreed judgment of public reprimand. An
evidentiary panel of the District 4 Grievance Committee found that
Shelsy engaged in conduct constituting obstruction of justice.
Shelsy violated Rule 8.04(a)(4). He was ordered to pay $500 in
attorneys’ fees.
PRIVATE REPRIMANDS
Listed here is a breakdown of Texas Disciplinary Rules of
Professional Conduct violations for six attorneys, with the number in
parentheses indicating the frequency of violation. Please note that an
attorney may be reprimanded for more than one rule violation.
1.01(b)(1)—for neglecting a legal matter entrusted to the lawyer
(1).
1.14(b)—for failing, upon receiving funds or other property in which a
client or third person has an interest, to promptly notify the client or
third person and render a full accounting upon request (2).
1.15(d)—for failing, upon termination of representation, to reasonably
protect a client’s interests, give notice to the client to seek other
counsel, or surrender papers and property that belong to the client
(1).
8.02(a)—making a statement that the lawyer knew to be false or with
reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the
qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory official or public
legal officer, or a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or
legal office (1).
8.04(a)(1)—for violating these Rules, knowingly assisting or inducing
another to do so, or doing so through the acts of another, whether or
not such violation occurred in the course of a client-lawyer
relationship (1).
8.04(a)(11)—for engaging in the practice of law when the lawyer is on
inactive status or when the lawyer’s right to practice has been
suspended or terminated, including but not limited to situations where a
lawyer’s right to practice has been administratively suspended for
failure to timely pay required fees or assessments or for failure to
comply with Article XII of the State Bar Rules relating to mandatory
continuing legal education (1). TBJ
