IN THE MATTER OF
JAMES F. PASCAL
VSB Docket No. 03-031-2021
On February 7, 2002, the district committee imposed a Private Reprimand with Terms upon the Respondent in VSB Docket No. 98-031-2009 for violating Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(1), 6-101(B) and (C), 7-101(A)(1) and (2), and 9-102(A) and (B). The terms required the Respondent to: (1) obtain an attorney trust account by January 1, 2002, and certify to bar counsel every six months that he was maintaining and using the trust account; 2) obtain six hours of Continuing Legal Education (CLE) credit in law office management, including instruction on the handling of an attorney trust account, not to apply the six hours of CLE credit to his annual Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) requirement and certify to bar counsel on or before November 14, 2002, that he had complied with the term; and (3) without notice to submit to random audits by the Virginia State Bar of his trust account records no more than twice a year and for two years. The misconduct determination provided that a Public Reprimand would be issued to the Respondent if he failed to comply with the Terms associated with the Private Reprimand.
At the hearing on February 12, 2003, the Respondent had the burden of showing by clear and convincing evidence that he had complied with each of the terms and therefore that the district committee should not impose the alternate sanction. After hearing the evidence presented and the argument of counsel, the district committee made the following findings of fact and misconduct determination.
I. Findings of Fact
1. The Respondent did not certify
in a timely manner to bar counsel that he was allegedly using his attorney trust
2. The Respondent did not obtain
six hours of CLE credit in law office management, applied the CLE credit he
did obtain to his MCLE requirement and did not certify in a timely manner to
bar counsel that he had allegedly obtained the requisite credit.
3. The Respondent did not comply with the term requiring him to submit to a random audit of his trust account records.
II. Misconduct Determination
Based the district committee's finding the Respondent failed to present clear and convincing evidence that he complied with the terms imposed in the prior misconduct proceedings, it is the decision of the district committee to impose the alternate sanction of a public reprimand. The Respondent is hereby so reprimanded.
Pursuant to Part Six, Section IV, Paragraph 13.B.8.c.(1) of the Rules of the Court, Virginia the Clerk of the Disciplinary System shall assess costs.
THIRD DISTRICT COMMITTEE,
OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR
Ray P. Lupold, III, Chair
Barbara Ann Williams, Bar Counsel