IN THE MATTER OF )
) Case No. 49S00-9606-DI-470
ANONYMOUS )
_________________________________________________________________
DISCIPLINARY ACTION
_________________________________________________________________
September 2, 1998
Per Curiam
The Disciplinary Commission and the respondent agree that the respondent in this lawyer disciplinary proceeding violated Rule 1.15(a)See footnote 1 1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Attorneys at Law by commingling personal funds with client funds in his lawyer trust account. The parties further agree that the appropriate sanction for that misconduct is a private reprimand. We agree and therefore accept the parties' agreed resolution, but wish to recount the facts and circumstances of this case in order to demonstrate the delicate nature of trust fund accounting and the need for diligent attention to the details of maintaining such an account.
regard to determining whether a violation of the anti-commingling rule has occurred, it is
irrelevant that the misconduct was not part of a scheme to conceal income, was not the
product of selfish or dishonest motives, or that client funds were never in fact at risk. Such
factors, however, do impact our assessment of proper sanction for violations of the rule.
That the respondent had no selfish motive, did not seek to conceal funds, and never placed
his client funds in any demonstrable risk is fortunate and relevant to assessment of sanction
and therefore persuades us that a private reprimand is appropriate in this instance.
Accordingly, the respondent and Commission's agreement in resolution of this case will be
accepted by separate order, and the respondent will be privately reprimanded.
Converted by Andrew Scriven