VIRGINIA:



BEFORE THE FIFTH DISTRICT COMMITTEE SECTION III

OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR



IN THE MATTER OF JOHN HENRY PARTRIDGE, ESQUIRE



VSB Docket # 00-053-0374



DISTRICT COMMITTEE DETERMINATION

(PUBLIC REPRIMAND)

 

On March 26, 2002, a hearing in this matter was held before a duly convened Fifth District Committee, Section III, panel consisting of Gregory Allen Porter, Esquire, H. Jan Roltsch-Anoll, Esquire, E. Allen Newcomb, Esquire, the Reverend Theodore Smith, C. Michael Hunter, and Joyce Ann N. Massey, Esquire, presiding. The Respondent, John Henry Partridge, Esquire, appeared and was represented by Pamela Bethel, Esquire. Seth M. Guggenheim, Assistant Bar Counsel, appeared as counsel for the Virginia State Bar.

Previously, on November 20, 2000, a subcommittee imposed a Private Reprimand with Terms, in accordance with an agreement between Respondent and Bar Counsel. Pursuant to Council Rule of Disciplinary Procedure IV (C), this hearing was held to require the Respondent to show cause why the alternative disposition should not be imposed for failure to comply with the terms imposed by the aforesaid disposition. Upon evidence and argument presented, the Fifth District Committee, Section III, finds that the Respondent was duly noticed of this hearing by a certified mailing, return receipt requested, to his last address of record with the Virginia State Bar, and that the terms were not fulfilled. Accordingly, the Committee hereby issues the following Public Reprimand:



I. FINDINGS OF FACT

1. At all times relevant hereto, the Respondent, John Henry Partridge, Esquire (hereinafter the Respondent), has been an attorney licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia.

2. On or about September 17, 1997, Sabbir and Rumana Ahmed (hereafter "Complainants") engaged Respondent to represent them in immigration matters.

3. Nothwithstanding Respondent's obligation to handle competently Complainants' case, he failed to properly monitor the progress of the case and failed to properly present a Motion asserting lack of notice of a deportation hearing.

II. NATURE OF MISCONDUCT

Such conduct by the Respondent, as set forth above, constitutes Misconduct in violation of the following Disciplinary Rules of the Revised Virginia Code of Professional Responsibility:

DR 6-101. Competence and Promptness.

(B) A lawyer shall attend promptly to matters undertaken for a client until completed or until the lawyer has properly and completely withdrawn from representing the client.

(C) A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about matters in which the lawyer's services are being rendered.


III. PUBLIC REPRIMAND

Accordingly, it is the decision of the Committee to impose a Public Reprimand and the Respondent is hereby so reprimanded.

Pursuant to Part Six, IV, 13(K)(10) of the Rules of the Supreme Court, the Clerk of the Disciplinary System shall assess costs.



FIFTH DISTRICT COMMITTEE SECTION III

OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR

 



By: ____________________________

Joyce Ann N. Massey



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE



I certify that I have this _____ day of _____________________________, 2002, mailed by CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, a true and correct copy of the District Committee Determination (Public Reprimand) to John Henry Partridge, Esquire, the Respondent, at 761 Monroe Street, Herndon, VA 20170, his last address of record with the Virginia State bar, and by first class mail, postage prepaid, to Seth M. Guggenheim, Assistant Bar Counsel at 100 North Pitt Street, Suite 310, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.



____________________________

Joyce Ann N. Massey