Disciplinary Bd. of the Supreme Court of State v. Carpenter (In re Application for Disciplinary Action Against Carpenter)
Decision Date | 01 May 2015 |
Docket Number | No. 20140254.,20140254. |
Citation | 863 N.W.2d 223 |
Parties | In the Matter of the Application for Disciplinary Action Against Kerry J. CARPENTER, a Member of the Bar of the State of North Dakota. Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota, Petitioner v. Kerry J. Carpenter, Respondent. |
Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Brent J. Edison, Bismarck, N.D., for petitioner.
Sean O. Smith, Bismarck, N.D., for respondent.
SUSPENSION ORDERED
[¶ 1] Attorney Kerry J. Carpenter objects to the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the Disciplinary Board that he be suspended from the practice of law for 90 days and be assessed the costs of the proceedings for violating N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.18, which addresses duties owed to potential clients, and N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.7, which addresses conflicts of interest. We conclude there is clear and convincing evidence Carpenter violated N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.18. We suspend Carpenter from the practice of law for 90 days commencing July 1, 2015, order that he complete six hours of Continuing Legal Education on conflicts of interest in addition to the mandatory requirements, and order that he pay $7,107.79 for the costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceedings.
[¶ 2] Carpenter was admitted to practice law in North Dakota on October 5, 1981. From 1981 until 1987, Carpenter worked as an oil and gas landman in North Dakota. During this period, Carpenter became a business acquaintance with another landman, Martin Thompson. After 1987, Carpenter began practicing law and also eventually became a real estate broker in Bismarck. In the late 1990s, the Christian Science Church listed property it owned in Bismarck with Carpenter and Carpenter assisted the Church in having the property re-zoned to facilitate its sale. Through the years, Thompson and his mother also listed their Bismarck homes for sale with Carpenter. In 2008, Thompson approached Carpenter about a potential opportunity to obtain mineral interests in McLean County. Although they agreed to a “50/50” partnership arrangement in the matter, the deal never came to fruition.
[¶ 3] In early 2009, Thompson learned that a deceased person had owned a large number of mineral acres in Mountrail County, and Thompson spent more than 300 hours researching the deceased's potential heirs so he could either negotiate a finder's fee, or lease or purchase the mineral acres. Thompson later obtained from an individual a copy of the deceased's will, which bequeathed the mineral acres to the headquarters of the Christian Science Church in Boston, Massachusetts. Thompson and a partner contacted a Williston attorney to assist them in negotiating with the Church. The attorney sent letters to the Church proposing several alternative deals, and accompanied the letters with copies of the will, other documents, and eventually, a notice of lapse of mineral interests under N.D.C.C. § 38–18.1 filed by the surface owners and first published on January 13, 2010. The attorney was unsuccessful in his negotiations with the Church, and on March 1, 2010, the Church advised the attorney that it was not interested in pursuing the matter.
[¶ 4] The Board found that on March 1, 2010, Thompson telephoned Carpenter about the Mountrail County mineral acres. On March 2, 2010, Thompson provided Carpenter with detailed information about the deceased's will, the Williston attorney's efforts to negotiate with the Church, and the potential that a portion of the mineral acreage could be lost because a notice of lapse had been filed. On March 3, 2010, Thompson and Carpenter met and Carpenter reviewed documents from Thompson's research file. Thompson provided Carpenter with copies of the deceased's will, the Williston attorney's first letter to the Church, a portion of an oil and gas lease involving the mineral interests, and the notice of lapse.
[¶ 5] On March 5, 2010, Carpenter sent a letter to Thompson “to confirm the nature of our meeting on March 3, 2010”:
[¶ 6] On March 11, 2010, Thompson sent a letter to Carpenter, stating:
At the disciplinary hearing, Carpenter and Thompson testified in accordance with their statements in the letters. The Board found that Thompson's version of the events on March 3, 2010, was “more credible” than Carpenter's version.
[¶ 7] After the meeting on March 3, 2010, Carpenter called the Church's local representative and on March 9, 2010, Carpenter participated in a conference call with the local representative and the estate and trust officer for the Church. Carpenter agreed to represent the Church in filing documents in Mountrail County to prevent the lapse of a portion of the deceased's mineral acres, and he did so. Carpenter also proposed to provide the estate and trust officer with his “agreement forms” if she was willing to take any further steps regarding the mineral acres. Carpenter eventually represented the Church in pursuing its claim to the bequeathed mineral acres. On December 10, 2010, Carpenter sent a letter to the estate and trust officer to “confirm the terms of Carpenter's representation of The Church to locate and recover mineral properties ... to which The Church has a legal claim to an ownership interest”:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Disciplinary Bd. of the Supreme Court of State v. Johnston (In re Johnston)
...Gerber v. Disciplinary Board, 2015 ND 217, ¶ 16, 868 N.W.2d 861 (quoting In re Disciplinary Action Against Carpenter, 2015 ND 111, ¶ 20, 863 N.W.2d 223 ).[¶ 27] As an additional violation of N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 5.3, the hearing panel has recommended Johnston be reprimanded for failing to s......
-
Gerber v. Disciplinary Bd. of the N.D. Supreme Court (In re Petition for Leave to Appeal By Gerber)
...or ‘piling on’ of rule violations for the same conduct is discouraged.” In re Disciplinary Action Against Carpenter, 2015 ND 111, ¶ 20, 863 N.W.2d 223. To the extent that the Inquiry Committee and Disciplinary Board's admonishment of Gerber included violation of N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 5.5(a),......
-
Disciplinary Bd. of the Supreme Court v. Ward (In re Application for Disciplinary Action Against Ward), 20150337.
...evidence that he violated any of the rules of professional conduct charged.[¶ 7] In Disciplinary Bd. v. Carpenter, 2015 ND 111, ¶ 9, 863 N.W.2d 223, we explained:This Court reviews disciplinary proceedings de novo on the record. Disciplinary Board v. Light, 2009 ND 83, ¶ 6, 765 N.W.2d 536 (......
-
Kuntz v. Disciplinary Bd. of the Supreme Court of N.D.
...information from the potential client. N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.18 (comment 6). In Disciplinary Bd. v. Carpenter, 2015 ND 111, ¶ 15, 863 N.W.2d 223 (quoting the ABA/BNA Lawyer's Manual on Professional Conduct, at 31:157 (2011)), we discussed significantly harmful information:Information may b......