Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Pollack

• Decision Date: 04 March 1981
• Docket Number: Docket No. 13
• Citation: 289 Md. 603,425 A.2d 1352
• Parties: ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. Herbert Leonard POLLACK. Misc.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

Page 603

289 Md. 603

425 A.2d 1352

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION OF MARYLAND v. Herbert Leonard POLLACK.

Misc. Docket No. 13.

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

March 4, 1981.

J. Edward Davis of Baltimore, for respondent.

Henry J. Myerberg, Asst. Bar Counsel, Annapolis, for petitioner.

Argued before MURPHY, C. J., and SMITH, DIGGES, ELDRIDGE, COLE, DAVIDSON and RODOWSKY, JJ.

PER CURIAM:

The Attorney Grievance Commission, acting through Bar Counsel, filed a Petition for Disciplinary Action against Herbert Leonard Pollack, alleging violations of the Disciplinary Rules of the Code of Professional Responsibility. We referred the matter, pursuant to Maryland Rule BV9 b, to Judge James W. Murphy, an Associate Judge of the Supreme Bench of Baltimore City, to make findings of fact and conclusions of law. After conducting an evidentiary hearing Judge Murphy, on November 7, 1980, filed detailed findings and conclusions as follows:

"FINDINGS OF FACT

"Respondent had been engaged in real estate title matters for at least two (2) years prior to being admitted to the practice of law in 1958.

"For most of his legal career he has been employed by the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore either as a right-of-way negotiator or as an assistant city solicitor in the Real Estate Division. His private law practice while so employed has been very minimal.

"For two (2) brief periods, one in 1961 and the other in 1976, he essayed attempts at the private practice of law as a sole practitioner, but on both occasions he returned to employment with Baltimore City.

"Respondent now has twenty-one (21) years in the Municipal Retirement System and can draw full retirement at the age of sixty-five (65).

"Sometime in September, 1977, Charles Lansberry, Jr., and Benjamin C. Brooks purchased at public auction in Baltimore City several parcels of real estate known as 1108, 1110 and 1112 West Fayette Street and 1311 Druid Hill Avenue. Thereupon, and in the month of September, 1977, the purchasers engaged Baltimore attorney James E. Crawford for the purpose of processing the purchase to have the title eventually recorded in the names of the purchasers. Because Mr. Crawford did not do that specific type work, he advised the purchasers that he would refer the matter to Baltimore attorney Herbert L. Pollack, the Respondent herein.

"In furtherance of this advice, Mr. Crawford contacted the Respondent in October, 1977, and furnished the Respondent with a copy of the aforementioned auction sale notice which had appeared in The Daily Record.

"The Respondent, for a fee, thereupon completed a title examination of the properties, prepared an appropriate deed from the sellers to the purchasers, and on November 10, 1977, held settlement at which time the deeds were properly executed.

"Following the settlement referred to above, the Respondent took the appropriate documents and checks necessary for recordation of the deed and payment of the transfer taxes for the purpose of recording the deed among the appropriate land records of Baltimore City.

"On or about March 31, 1978, the purchasers, while examining title for said properties as part of a real estate study course project, determined that the deed had not yet been recorded. On the same day, the purchasers coincidentally met the Respondent on the street near the Baltimore City courthouse and advised Respondent that the deed was not recorded, and the Respondent stated that he would follow it up.

"Thereafter, the Respondent caused the deed to be recorded among the land records of Baltimore City on June 30, 1978, and the appropriate recording costs and transfer taxes were paid at the same time.

"After settlement, Respondent had put the checks and deed in a file since it was too late to record the deed on that day. The following day, a Friday, November 11, 1977, happened also to be a legal holiday, i. e., Veterans' Day. Thereafter, Respondent forgot about recording the deed until March 31, 1978, when confronted by the purchasers. A search of his office and home failed to turn up the deed.

"Being very experienced and well-versed in real estate matters, the Respondent was fully aware of the possible consequences from the failure to record a deed. At no time did he call the purchasers to advise that he could not find the deed. He may have spoken to the referring attorney, Crawford, but did not advise him that the deed was lost. At no time did Respondent seek to obtain a confirmatory deed.

"It was not until June of 1978 that Respondent found the deed and checks in a drawer in the Land Record Office of the Superior Court of Baltimore City. Since he spent a considerable period of time in said office, he had been using this drawer with the permission of the Clerk of the Superior Court.

"Upon finding said deed, Respondent ordered a new lien sheet and recorded the deed as previously stated.

"The payments incidental to the recording costs and the transfer taxes were drawn by Mr. Crawford on his escrow account to the order of 'Robert H. Bouse, Clerk of Superior Court of Baltimore City' and delivered to the Respondent. None of the funds described herein were at any time misused, misapplied or misappropriated by the Respondent.

"At no time during the period of the entire transaction described hereinabove were the sellers or the purchasers in any way whatsoever injured or damaged; the sellers at the time of the settlement were paid the full purchase price for the sale; there was no mortgage or other financing of the purchase attendant to the transaction; there were no intervening liens, judgments or other encumbrances placed on the properties at any time; the purchasers at no time made any attempt to resell the properties or to have the properties encumbered as collateral on any intended loans or mortgages.

"The record discloses that the Respondent was suspended from the practice of law for a six (6) month period in 1977, but the reason therefor was not stated.

"William Hoffman, Esq., Chief of the Real Estate Section of the City Solicitor's Office, secured a leave of absence for Respondent so that he could resume his employment with the City after his period of suspension. Benjamin Brown, Esq., City Solicitor and Mr. Hoffman testified that Respondent is an excellent employee, both knowledgeable and diligent.

"The Court finds the Respondent to be inexcusably negligent in the recording of the deed to the properties in question.

"CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

"From the above facts, the Court concludes that Respondent has violated the following...