Board of Professional Responsibility, Wyoming State Bar v. Laurence W. Stinson, WSB No. 6-2918 , 394 P.3d 483 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •           IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING
    
    2017 WY 58
    April Term, A.D. 2017
    May 17, 2017
    BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL
    RESPONSIBILITY, WYOMING
    STATE BAR,
    Petitioner,
    D-15-0007
    v.
    LAURENCE W. STINSON, WSB No.
    6-2918,
    Respondent.
    ORDER REINSTATING ATTORNEY TO THE PRACTICE OF LAW
    [¶1] This matter came before the Court upon an “Order Recommending the Grant of
    Petition for Reinstatement of Laurence W. Stinson,” filed herein May 3, 2017, by the
    Board of Professional Responsibility for the Wyoming State Bar. On February 24, 2016,
    this Court suspended Respondent from the practice of law for a period of nine months,
    with the suspension beginning on March 7, 2016. Board of Professional Responsibility,
    Wyoming State Bar v. Stinson, 
    2016 WY 25
    , 
    370 P.3d 72
    (Wyo. 2016). Now, after a
    careful review of the Board of Professional Responsibility’s Order Recommending the
    Grant of Petition for Reinstatement of Laurence W. Stinson and the file, this Court finds
    that the recommendation for reinstatement should be approved, confirmed, and adopted
    by the Court and that the Respondent, Laurence W. Stinson, should be reinstated to the
    practice of law. It is, therefore,
    [¶2] ADJUDGED AND ORDERED that the Board of Professional Responsibility’s
    Order Recommending the Grant of Petition for Reinstatement of Laurence W. Stinson,
    which is attached hereto and incorporated herein, shall be, and the same hereby is,
    approved, confirmed, and adopted by this Court; and it is further
    [¶3] ADJUDGED AND ORDERED that the Respondent, Laurence W. Stinson, be,
    and hereby is, reinstated to the practice of law in Wyoming, effective immediately; and it
    is further
    [¶4] ORDERED that this Order Reinstating Attorney to the Practice of Law, along
    with the incorporated Order Recommending the Grant of Petition for Reinstatement of
    Laurence W. Stinson, shall be published in the Wyoming Reporter and the Pacific
    Reporter; and it is further
    [¶5] ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall docket this Order Reinstating
    Attorney to the Practice of Law, along with the incorporated Order Recommending the
    Grant of Petition for Reinstatement of Laurence W. Stinson, as a matter coming regularly
    before this Court as a public record; and it is further
    [¶6] ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court transmit a copy of this Order Reinstating
    Attorney to the Practice of Law to the members of the Board of Professional
    Responsibility and to the clerks of the appropriate courts of the State of Wyoming.
    [¶7]   DATED this 17th day of May, 2017.
    BY THE COURT: *†
    /s/
    E. JAMES BURKE
    Chief Justice
    *Justice Davis took no part in the consideration of this matter.
    †
    Justice Kautz would have denied reinstatement.
    BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT
    STATE OF WYOMING
    D- 15--0007
    IN THE SUPREME COURT
    In the matter of the petition )                                  STATE OF WYOMING
    FILED
    for reinstatement of                 WSB No. 2014-102
    LAURENCE W. STINSON,          )                                    MAY 03 2017
    WSB Attorney No. 6-2918 )                                      P   1CIA BENNUT, CLEpl<
    C4A_Alk
    CHIEF DEPUTY
    ORDER RECOMMENDING THE GRANT OF
    PETITION FOR REINSTATEMENT
    OF LAURENCE W.STINSON, WSB #6-2918
    THIS MATTER having come before the Board of Professional
    Responsibility In the matter of the petition for reinstatement of Laurence W.
    Stinson, WSB # 6-2918, the hearing having been held April 18, 2017 in
    Cheyenne, Wyoming, and the Board being fully apprised in the premises,
    hereby makes the following findings:
    1.    A reinstatement proceeding was initiated by the filing of a Petition
    for Reinstatement. The nine month suspension of Laurence W. Stinson started
    March 7, 2016. A Petition for Reinstatement was timely served on October
    27, 2016 and filed by the Clerk of the Board of Professional Responsibility on
    November 3, 2016. During the nine month suspension, Bar dues were kept
    current, and CLE remained current.         Bar Counsel did not stipulate to
    reinstatement based on concerns of a continued internet presence and lack of
    rehabilitation.
    2.      The parties stipulated and agreed that the former Disciplinary
    Code of the Wyoming State Bar applies to Respondent's reinstatement
    proceedings as the Disciplinary Code was in effect at the time the formal
    charge in this matter was filed against Respondent in December, 2014. See,
    Board of Professional Responsibility v. Fulton, 
    370 P.3d 65
    (Wyo. 2016);
    Reinstatement of Jones, 
    82 P.3d 1239
    (Wyo. 2004).
    3.      Section 24(g) of the Disciplinary Code provides:
    If Bar Counsel does not stipulate to reinstatement or if the
    BPR or Court does not approve a stipulation for
    reinstatement, a hearing shall be held by the BPR. At the
    hearing, the suspended or disbarred attorney shall have the
    burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence the
    following:
    (i)   The respondent has been rehabilitated;
    (ii) The respondent has substantially complied with all
    requirements imposed by the Court;
    (iii) The respondent has the character and fitness qualifications
    to practice law in this state as outlined in Section IV of the
    Wyoming Rules and Procedures Governing Admission to the Practice
    of Law;
    (iv) The respondent is competent to practice law in this state;
    (v) The respondent's resumption of the practice of law shall not
    be detrimental to the administration of justice and the public
    interest.
    2
    4.      Specific Character and Fitness Requirements. Section IV of the
    Wyoming Rules and Procedures Governing Admission to the Practice of Law
    (the "Admission Rules"), incorporated by reference in Section 24(g) of the
    Disciplinary Code, sets forth the character and fitness requirements for
    admission to the Wyoming State Bar. Rule 401 provides in relevant part:
    Rule 401. Character and Fitness Requirements.
    (a) Duties of Applicant. Every applicant must produce
    satisfactory evidence of good moral character and an adequate
    knowledge of the standards and ideals of the profession and that
    such person is otherwise fit to practice law within the State of
    Wyoming. The applicant shall have the burden of proving that the
    applicant is possessed of good moral character and is fit to
    practice law. ***
    (b) Purposes of Character and Fitness Screening. The
    primary purposes of character and fitness screening before
    admission to the Bar are to assure the protection of the public and
    safeguard the justice system. The Committee shall not
    recommend an applicant be admitted to practice law if the
    Committee believes that such applicant would, if admitted to
    practice law in Wyoming, be unable or unwilling to act in
    accordance with the standards set forth in the Wyoming Rules of
    Professional Conduct, and to act fairly, honestly, reasonably and
    with unquestionable integrity in all matters in which he or she acts
    as an attorney at law.
    (1) Good moral character includes but is not limited to a
    record of conduct manifesting the qualities of honesty, candor,
    trustworthiness, observance of fiduciary responsibilities,
    adherence to the law, and a respect for the rights of other
    persons and the judicial process.
    (2) Fitness to practice law includes but is not limited to a
    record of conduct that establishes that the applicant meets the
    essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law. The
    essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law are:
    (A) The ability to exercise good judgment and to conduct
    oneself with a high degree of honesty, integrity and
    3
    trustworthiness in financiai dealings, legal obligations,
    professional relationships, and in one's professional
    business;
    (B) The ability to conduct oneself in a manner that
    engenders respect for the law and adheres to the Wyoming
    Rules of Professional Conduct;
    (C) The ability to diligently, reliably, and timely perform
    legal tasks and fulfill professional obligations to clients,
    attorneys, courts and others;
    (D) The ability to competently undertake fundamental
    lawyering skills such as legal reasoning and analysis,
    recollection of complex factual information and integration
    of such information with complex legal theories, problem
    solving, and recognition and reso!ution of ethical dilemmas;
    and
    (E) The ability to communicate comprehensibly with
    clients, attorneys, courts, and others.
    (c) Factors Considered. The following factors shall be
    considered when determining an applicant's good moral character
    and fitness to practice law:
    (1)   Unlawful conduct;
    (2)   Academic misconduct;
    (3) Making or procuring any false or misleading statement
    or omission of relevant information, including any false or
    misleading statement or omission on the application for
    admission to the Bar, or any amendment, or in any testimony
    or sworn statement submitted to the Board or the Committee;
    (4)   Misconduct in employment;
    (5) Acts involving         dishonesty,    fraud,   deceit   or
    misrepresentation;
    (6)   Abuse of !egal process;
    (7)   Neglect of financial responsibilities;
    (8)   Neglect of professional obligations;
    4
    (9)    Violation of an order of a court;
    (10) Conduct demonstrating an inability to meet one or
    more essential eligibility requirements for the practice of law;
    (11) Conduct that physically threatens or harms another
    person;
    (12) Denial of admission to the bar in this or another
    jurisdiction on character and fitness grounds;
    (13) Disciplinary action by the lawyer disciplinary agency
    or other professional disciplinary agency of any jurisdiction;
    and
    (14) Any other conduct which reflects adversely upon the
    good moral character or fitness of the applicant to practice law.
    (d) Prior Conduct—Aggravating and Mitigating Factors. In
    making the determination on character and fitness of each
    applicant, the following factors should be considered in assigning
    weight and significance to prior conduct of the applicant:
    (1)    The applicant's age at the time of the conduct;
    (2)    The recency of the conduct;
    (3) The reliability of the information concerning the
    conduct;
    (4)   The seriousness of the conduct;
    (5)   The factors or circumstances underlying the conduct;
    (6)   The cumulative effect of the conduct or information;
    (7)   The evidence of rehabilitation;
    (8) The applicant's positive social contributions since the
    conduct;
    (9)   The applicant's candor in the admissions process;
    (10) The      materiality       of    any     omissions      or
    misrepresentations.
    5
    (11) An applicant who affirmatively asserts rehabilitation
    from prior conduct must produce evidence of rehabilitation
    which may include, but is not limited to, the following:
    (A) compliance with the specific conditions of any
    disciplinary, judicial, administrative, or other order, where
    applicable;
    (B) good      character and     moral standing     in   the
    community;
    (C) good reputation for professional ability, where
    applicable;
    (D) lack of malice and ill feeling toward those who, by
    duty, were compelled to bring about the disciplinary,
    judicial, administrative, or other proceeding;
    (E) personal assurances, supported by corroborating
    evidence, of a desire and intention to conduct one's self in
    an exemplary fashion in the future;
    (F) restitution of funds or property, where applicable;
    (G) positive action showing rehabilitation by occupation,
    community service or civic service; and
    (H) any other evidence which reflects rehabilitation of
    the applicant.
    5.     Petitioner presented evidence that he had not practiced law during
    the period of his suspension. While evidence was presented of a continued
    internet presence, there was no evidence presented that such presence was
    intended or resulted in the practice of law by the Petitioner.
    6.     Petitioner further presented evidence of development and
    acceptance of the wrongful nature of his prior conduct and expressed remorse
    and contrition for such conduct. In response, the evidence of prior misconduct
    6
    was presented. The Board was persuaded by the Wyoming Supreme Court's
    decision in the matter of the Petition for Reinstatement of Frank J. Jones, 
    82 P.3d 1239
    at 1241:
    While the Board is as concerned as Professor Burman about
    the nature of that conduct and its implications, Mr. Jones
    expressed, to some greater or lesser degree, contrition for
    such conduct; and the Board is not persuaded that delaying
    a reinstatement of Mr. Jones, awaiting the passage of more
    time, will serve any useful purpose.
    Further, the Wyoming Supreme Court went onto state:
    In attempting to make a determination as to whether the
    petitioner in this case has been rehabilitated, the Board was
    persuaded that a useful definition of "rehabilitation" is found
    in Avila v. The People of the State of Colorado, 53[sic] P.3d
    230, 232 (Colo. PDJ 2002) quoted by petitioner in his
    Memorandum in Support of Petition for Reinstatement:
    Rehabilitation for purposes of attorney reinstatement and
    readmission to the bar has been defined as "the
    reestablishment of the reputation of a person by his or her
    restoration to a useful and constructive place in society."
    [citation omitted]
    Based upon this definition and the evidence before it,
    the Board concludes that Mr. Jones demonstrated his
    rehabilitation.
    The Board also concludes that it is not required to find or
    conclude that there is, or must be demonstrated by
    petitioner, an absolute certainty or guarantee that the
    petitioner will never again engage in the kind of misconduct
    which led to his disbarment. It is impossible for the Board
    to reach such a conclusion. Further, such a burden places
    the bar too high and would doom every petition for
    reinstatement. For these propositions, the Board relies on
    The Matter of McKeon, 
    201 Mont. 515
    , 656 P.2d 179(1982)
    also cited and quoted in petitioner's Memorandum in
    Support of Petition for Reinstatement. Rather, the Board
    concludes that it must attempt to discern, from the evidence
    7
    presented, whether the petitioner demonstrates current
    moral and ethical behavior and fitness to reenter the
    practice of law.
    
    Id. at 1242.
    Based on the foregoing, it hereby is the recommendation of a majority
    of the Board of Professional Responsibility that Petitioner has met his burden
    of proof, and that the Petition be granted to allow Mr. Stinson to be reinstated
    as an attorney licensed practice law in the state of Wyoming.
    DATED this    cp3—    day of    C-2.4a.A_Li         , 2017.
    Studer, Chair
    oard of Professional Responsibility
    Wyoming State Bar
    8
    

Document Info

Docket Number: D-15-0007

Citation Numbers: 2017 WY 58, 394 P.3d 483

Filed Date: 5/17/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/12/2023