Clark, Matter of, D-6

Decision Date10 July 1980
Docket NumberD-6
Citation613 P.2d 1218
PartiesIn the Matter of the Suspension of Dean W. CLARK from the Practice of Law.
CourtWyoming Supreme Court

Joseph H. Thibodeau, Denver, for respondent.

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER OF SUSPENSION

PER CURIAM.

This matter came on for hearing before the court upon the findings, order and recommendations of the Grievance Committee, Wyoming State Bar, dated May 16, 1980 and filed herein May 19, 1980. After notice was given to respondent of his right of personal appearance prior to the entry of any order by this court, he personally appeared before this court, together with his counsel, Joseph H. Thibodeau, Esq., a member of the Colorado Bar, specially admitted to practice before this court for the purposes of this disciplinary hearing. The court has considered the recommendations contained in the order of May 16, together with the record of the proceedings, the oral presentation by respondent and a written memorandum thereafter presented in his behalf, and now makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order of Suspension:

Findings of Fact

1. Dean W. Clark was admitted to the bar of this court on July 27, 1959 and since that time has been and now is a member of the Wyoming State Bar.

2. On April 22, 1980, in criminal proceedings in the United States District Court for the District of Wyoming, and after entry of plea of nolo contendere to the charges therein involved, respondent was duly convicted in said court upon three counts of violation of Title 26, United States Code, § 7203, namely, willful failure to file federal income tax returns for the years 1977, 1978 and 1979. Said § 7203 provides that any person who shall willfully fail to file such return shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both, together with the costs of prosecution.

3. By the judgment entered in said federal district court, respondent was fined $500 on each of the three counts and placed on probation under the supervision of that court for two years, special conditions of the probation being that respondent should file returns for the years omitted and pay all back taxes, interest and penalties as determined by the Internal Revenue Service.

4. Following receipt by this court of notification of such conviction, this court on April 25, 1980 entered its order suspending respondent from the further practice of law and referring the matter to the Grievance Committee, Wyoming State Bar, for formal disciplinary proceedings as required by Rule X, Disciplinary Code of the Wyoming State Bar.

5. At a hearing before the committee after due and proper notice, respondent personally appeared with counsel, witnesses in his behalf were heard by the committee and the testimony transcribed in writing, a copy of which is on file with this court. At such hearing no attempt was made to deny the validity of the conviction or the factual basis upon which the federal charges had been predicated. Respondent frankly admitted the nonfiling and that he was aware of the statute and its requirements. Evidence proffered in his behalf related to the question of mitigation and the punitive action which the committee should recommend to this court.

6. The committee, after hearing respondent's presentation and considering the evidence presented, has recommended to this court that respondent be suspended from the practice of law in the State of Wyoming for a period of 60 days from April 25, 1980, the date of the original order of suspension entered in this court. Such recommendation is regularly made in compliance with the provisions of Rule V, Disciplinary Code, which provides in pertinent part that if the committee finds the charges proved by "substantial, clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence, it shall recommend discipline and the extent thereof . . ." Regrettably, no specific findings of fact or conclusions are contained in the order of the committee except the fact of conviction upon the federal charges. However, it is evident that the committee conducted the hearing mainly as one concerned with the punishment that should be meted out by this court and after consideration of all the evidence has attempted to give effect to all mitigating circumstances. While we would have preferred further advice from the committee as to the factual basis for its recommendation, we do not feel it necessary to remand the matter for further findings. The ultimate responsibility as to the penalty to be imposed rests with this court and we make the following additional findings:

a. Respondent knew that he was required to file such returns and his failure to do so was at his own election, not resulting from physical or mental infirmity or illness or from conditions beyond his control.

b. Prior to being contacted by agents of the Internal Revenue Service respondent had sought advice from an accountant practicing in the tax field and told him of his failure to file, promised to deliver to that accountant papers necessary for the preparation of proper returns, but failed to follow through with his intentions. He later sought further advice and was again advised to bring in the necessary papers and again failed to do so.

c. After investigation by the Internal Revenue Service was commenced respondent fully cooperated with its agents and has made full disclosure of his financial records to the best of his ability. Respondent has indicated every intention of complying with the probation order of the United States District Court and there is nothing in the record to indicate that he is in default in such performance.

d. During the period in question respondent was engaged in the practice of law in Green River, Wyoming, both in private practice and as attorney for the Town of Green River. The city at that time was involved in numerous problems resulting from boom conditions and respondent devoted much time to those problems. According to testimony of a friend and former associate in the law practice, respondent was generous with his time to his clients, worked hard to take care of their problems, and paid little attention to his own financial matters. According to lay persons with whom he had regular contact he was conscientious in attending to the problems of others, was readily available for consultation, and worked long hours. There is no evidence in the record that he has been derelict in the representation of his clients' interests.

e. During this period of time respondent's wife was undergoing serious health problems, causing considerable mental stress to respondent and at times necessitating hospitalization of the wife. Respondent, as husband and father of three children of the marriage in elementary school, was involved in their care and supervision to a much greater extent than is required of the usual husband and father.

f. During the period in question taxes were being withheld from respondent's compensation by the Town of Green River and paid to the Internal Revenue Service. During a part of this time information returns were filed by a partnership in which respondent was a member, indicating respondent's share of the partnership income. Respondent had previously filed income tax returns and the years 1976, 1977 and 1978 appear to be the only years for which he did not file returns. It thus appears that there has been no...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Meyer v. Norman
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 24 août 1989
    ...it is this court, not the grievance committee, that maintains control over disciplinary proceedings at all times. Matter of Clark, 613 P.2d 1218 (Wyo.1980); Mendicino. See Spriggs. To accomplish its appropriate role effectively, however, it is essential that the committee be vested with cer......
  • Committee on Legal Ethics of W. Va. State Bar v. Higinbotham
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 12 mars 1986
    ...N.Y.S.2d 633 (1983) (three-month suspension); Matter of Wilentz, 69 N.J. 121, 351 A.2d 347 (1976) (one-year suspension); Matter of Clark, 613 P.2d 1218 (Wyo.1980) (six-month suspension); In re Disciplinary Action Against Lee, supra (one-year suspension); Columbus State Bar Association v. Wo......
  • Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Hiatt
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 11 juin 2018
    ...P.3d 790, 793 (Wyo. 2014); Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Davidson , 2009 WY 48, ¶ 17, 205 P.3d 1008, 1015 (Wyo. 2009) ; In re Clark , 613 P.2d 1218, 1221 (Wyo. 1980) ). "The BPR is an ancillary body structured by the Court and has no independent power, jurisdiction, or authority other tha......
  • Bd. of Prof'l Responsibility v. Casper
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • 19 février 2014
    ...integrity of the bar and to prevent the transgressions of an individual lawyer from bringing its image into disrepute,” In re Clark, 613 P.2d 1218, 1221 (Wyo.1980) (quoting Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Maryland v. Walman, 280 Md. 453, 374 A.2d 354, 361 (1977)), and to “protect the public an......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Office of Bar Counsel
    • United States
    • Wyoming State Bar Wyoming Lawyer No. 41-2, April 2018
    • Invalid date
    ...565 P.2d 460 (Wyo. 1977); Mendocino v. Magagna, 572 P.2d 21 (Wyo. 1977); Rooney v. Whitchurch, 585 P.2d 1202 (Wyo. 1978); In re Clark, 613 P.2d 1218 (Wyo. 1980); Grievance Committee, Wyo. State Bar v. Riner,765 R2d 925 (Wyo. 1988). [14] "A. G. Will No Longer Prosecute Grievances," Wyoming L......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT