Loading

Disciplinary Reporter Case Digest

Attorney ID 69662
Attorney Name Barr, Craig Alan
DBP Docket No. 46 DB 2000
Supreme Court Docket No. 687 D.D. No. 3
County Philadelphia
Disciplinary Counsel David M. Lame
Counsel for Respondent Craig Simpson
Decision Date 2001-08-15
Effective Date 2001-09-15
Case Digest Respondent served as a Treasurer for a non-profit organization. While serving as Treasurer, Respondent misappropriated funds which Respondent testified at the hearing he used to support his drug habit. Respondent was arrested and criminally charged for the theft and in a plea agreement with the association, paid restitution and was placed in the ARD Program. Respondent successfully completed the ARD Program and ODC after the letter of inquiry process filed a Petition for Discipline against Respondent. At the hearing, Respondent presented personal testimony of his cocaine habit and attempted suicides but this testimony was not offered for Braun type mitigation. Respondent stipulated to all of the facts in question as well as acknowledging his violation of RPC 8.4(c). The Hearing Committee recommended in a thorough and concise Hearing Committee Report that Respondent receive a Private Reprimand. Neither party opposed such a recommendation. The Disciplinary Board, in its de novo review, viewed Respondent's testimony as Braun mitigation and determined that there is no distinction between theft of funds of an organization and theft of client money. The Disciplinary Board recommended Respondent be suspended for three years. Following Respondent's Petition for Review, the Supreme Court reduced the suspension to a period of two years.
Rule Violation(s) 8.4(c)
Discipline Imposed Two-year suspension
Points of Law There is no distinction between stealing client funds and misappropriating funds of an organization in which a lawyer holds office.
Report/Opinion Download