In re Davidson

• Decision Date: 05 November 1947
• Docket Number: 3480.
• Parties: In re DAVIDSON.
• Court: Nevada Supreme Court

186 P.2d 354

64 Nev. 514

In re DAVIDSON.

No. 3480.

Supreme Court of Nevada

November 5, 1947

Disciplinary proceedings by the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Nevada against John Davidson, attorney at law. The Board of Governors suspended the attorney for six months, and the attorney petitions for review.

Order in accordance with opinion.

Samuel Platt, of Reno, for petitioner.

Harlan L. Heward, of Reno, representative of Board of Governors of the State Bar.

WM. D HATTON, District Judge.

This matter is brought before this Court by the petition of the defendant for a review and reversal of the Findings and Recommendations of the Local Administrative Committee of the State Bar of Nevada for for the County of Washoe and of the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Nevada in a proceeding in which the Defendant was charged with unethical conduct as an attorney at law.

The said proceeding resulted in the following Findings and Recommendations by the Board of Governors:

Findings

1. The Board of Governors of the State Bar of Nevada find that the said accused, John Davidson, did, in Reno Nevada, on July 15, 1946, pay the sum of $25 to one Peter James Howton Rogers for forwarding a divorce client to said accused, and that said accused remunerated said Peter James Howton Rogers for soliciting and obtaining professional employment for said accused, and that said accused did directly share with an unlicensed person, to-wit, Peter James Howton Rogers, compensation arising out of and incidental to professional employment.

2. The Board of Governors find that said accused, John Davidson did, in Reno, Nevada, on July 17, 1946, pay the sum of $25 to one Peter James Houghton Rogers for forwarding a divorce client to the said accused, and that said accused remunerated said Peter James Houghton Rogers for soliciting and obtaining professional employment for said accused, and that said accused did directly share with an unlicensed person, to-wit said Peter James Houghton Rogers, compensation arising out of and incidental to professional employment.

Recommendations

That the Board of Governors of the State Bar of Nevada respectfully recommend to the Supreme Court of the State of Nevada that the accused, John Davidson, be suspended for a period of six months on Count 1 and be suspended six months on count 2, both of said counts to run concurrently, rently, and until further order of the Court; that during the period of suspension of accused, John Davidson, that he be restrained from the practice of law, either directly or indirectly, until he be reinstated by an order of the Supreme Court.

The Local Administrative Committee had recommended suspension of one year on each count, to run consecutively. Thus the Board of Governors, in effect, reduced the suspension from two years to six months.

To the defendant's petition for review the State Bar filed its answer. Arguments were duly presented and the matter submitted for decision.

In the proceeding before the Local Administrative Committee, the first witness called on behalf of the State Bar was Claude J. Cormier. The witness testified that he was a deputy sheriff assigned to the office of the District Attorney as a special investigator; that at the request of the chairman of the Local Administrative Committee for Washoe County he ascertained that the defendant had filed in the office of the Clerk of the District Court for Washoe County, during the period from January 2 to December 31, 1945, 253 divorce cases, and in the period from January 2 to July 24, 1946, 191 cases. The witness further testified that he had heard, as a matter of rumor, that the defendant had been connected, with pay-offs to laymen in divorce cases and that he had reported such rumors to the chairman of the Local Administrative Committee. Peter James Houghton Rogers testified on behalf of the State Bar. He testified, in substance, that, at the request of the chairman of the Local Administrative Committee, he agreed to assist the latter in an investigation of possible unethical practices on the part of certain lawyers; that on July 15, 1946, he called on the defendant and the latter agreed to 'deal' with him in the matter of handling divorce cases; that pursuant to this understanding he took to defendant's office one Betty Bar who, for the occasion, used the name of Jean Wilson; that after the latter had an interview with the defendant, the witness took her from the office, at which time the defendant requested him to come back around three or four o'clock; that he returned at three o'clock, at which time the defendant paid him $25; that no amount had been stipulated between them; that he mentioned to the defendant that he had found the woman a place to stay, that he had located her at Washoe Pines; and that the witness and defendant had no discussion concerning taxi fare. The witness further testified, in substance, that on July 17, 1946, he took to the defendant's office one Gladys Petrie who, for the occasion, used the name of H. Gertrude Porter; that after the latter had an interview with defendant, the witness took her from the office; that fifteen or twenty minutes later he returned to defendant's office and again received $25, and that, upon his leaving, the defendant said, 'Leave your hat and leave your badge off; I don't want people to see taxi drivers coming up to my office.' The witness testified that nothing was said about a loan. Harlan L. Heward, Chairman of the Local Administrative Committee for Washoe County, testified that, with the authorization of said Committee, he arranged with the witness Rogers for his visits to the office of the defendant which are referred to in the testimony of Rogers. Mr. Davidson, the defendant, testified, in substance, that on July 15, 1946, the witness Rogers brought to his office the said Jean Wilson; that he had never seen Rogers before; that Rogers inquired of him as to where he might take prospective divorce clients for places of residence, saying that he, Rogers, had had trouble with some of the attorneys who sought to make a charge for taking or referring persons to places where they might reside, and that thereupon he gave Rogers a number of addresses; that Rogers came in later and brought with him a lady and introduced her to defendant; that he talked with her and charged her $250 and that she paid $100 on account; that Rogers came back later and said he had to take the lady to Washoe Pines and was entitled to $25 for taxi fare, and that he gave Rogers the $25. The defendant further testified that on the 16th or 17th, Rogers brought to his office the said H. Gertrude Porter and introduced her; that he talked with Mrs. Porter and that she paid him $100 on account; that Rogers came back later and said, 'How about a fee for me in this case?'; that he, defendant, said, 'I do not pay commissions on divorces'; that Rogers said, 'I need some money,' and that he loaned him $25 until his next pay-day, and directed his secretary to 'mark on my book I am giving this man $25.00 as a loan,' and said to Rogers, 'I don't want any taxi-cab drivers in this office.' Asked why he loaned the money to Rogers, defendant replied, 'He asked for it, actually, he said he needed it.' George E. Johnson, a witness for defendant, testified that he kept a drawer filing case in the office of defendant, in the outer, or reception, room, and that on July 17, 1946, he went there to place some records in the file, on which occasion the defendant came from the inner room and said, 'Marge, I am loaning this fellow $25.00; take his name and address, and I don't want any damn taxi driver hanging around this office.' Marge Hanson, Mr. Davidson's secretary, testified, in substance, that on July 17, 1946, the said Mrs. Porter came to the office and was introduced to the defendant by Rogers; that after her departure Rogers came back alone and went into the inner office and was there about two minutes, whereupon defendant opened the door and said, 'I am loaning this Taxi-driver $25.00; put it down in the book'; that she entered on the book, 'Loaned taxi-driver $25.00'; that defendant did not ask her to get the taxi-driver's name; that she could not see the taxi-driver, he being in the inner office room, that defendant apparently spoke to him, and that she had no knowledge as to when he left by defendant's private door. Upon the closing of the testimony taken before the Local Administrative Committee, the defendant, on his own behalf, presented his argument as to the merits of the case. The argument was taken down by the reporter in attendance, and a copy thereof, duly certified by the reporter, was admitted in evidence. (Transcript of Proceedings before the Board of Governors, page 40.) In the course of his argument, the defendant said: 'I purposely made this suggestion of a loan so I wouldn't be in a position of being charged with giving him a commission.' In his testimony, he stated, in substance, that he instructed his secretary to make a memorandum of the transaction, 'the fact that I had made a loan, that she could testify to the fact that I had done it.' The witness Rogers testified that the taxi-cab fare from any point in downtown Reno to Washoe Pines, being 25 miles, at 30 cents a mile, amounted to $7.50. On the examination of the defendant by the Chairman of the Local Committee, the Chairman stated, 'The regular rate to Washoe Pines is $10.00,' to which defendant replied, 'I didn't know that.'

The first ground for reversal set forth in the petition and urged upon the argument is that the entrapment of the defendant was unfair and contrary to public policy and that the evidence so procured should have been disregarded by the Local Committee and by the Board of Governors and should...