In Re James Himmel, Attorne

533 N.E.2d 790 (1988)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Himmel, attorney at law, had knowledge of Casey's, attorney at law, conversion of Tammy Forsberg funds. Himmel was Forsberg’s current attorney, and Casey was her former attorney. Forsberg was injured in a motorcycle accident and retained Casey to represent her. Casey negotiated a settlement of $35,000 and pursuant to an agreement, Casey would get 1/3. Casey got the check, endorsed it and deposited it into his client trust fund account and then converted the funds. Forsberg tried for two years to collect her share and then retained Himmel. The Fosberg-Himmel agreement allowed Himmel, 1/3 of the monies above the $23,233.34 recovered from Casey. Himmel discovered the conversion and drafted an agreement for Casey to pay Fosberg $75,000 in settlement. Fosberg agreed not to initiate any criminal, civil or attorney disciplinary action against Casey. This agreement was executed, but Casey defaulted and a court judgment was obtained for $100,000. Himmel was charged with violation of Rule 103(a) for the failure to report attorney misconduct. Himmel only recovered $10,400 from Casey and got no fee for his efforts. The Hearing Board found that Himmel had gotten unprivileged information about Casey's activities and that Himmel had failed to report this activity. Himmel was issued a reprimand. Himmel appealed. The Review Board found that Himmel had not violated the rule and recommended dismissal of the complaint.