Delaware: Attorney put on probation for failing to represent client

Link for opinion: http://couts.delaware.gov/opinions/lists.aspx?ag=Supreme+Count

In re Elgart, Supreme Court No. 376,2010, the Delaware Supreme Court publicly reprimanded and placed Elgart on two years of probation for failing to properly represent his client which is in violation of rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4 (a) (3), 1.4 (a) 4, 1.15 (d) of the Delaware lawyers Rules of Professional Conduct.
The attorney also violated Rule 8.1 (b) of the Delaware Lawyer Rules of Professional Conduct by failing to disclose records in connection with this disciplinary matter.

The Court affirmed the Board on Professional Responsibility’s findings. Even though the failure to represent his client, as well as failing to keep the client informed, may not have been intentional and a result of poor office management, the client was actually injured. The attorney failed to disburse funds to the client in a timely manner and let the statute of limitations fun on the under insurance claim. Elgart acknowledged the injuries and expressed remorse for his actions or lack thereof. The Board found the probationary period appropriate based upon the following case law: Matter of Howard, 705 A. 2d 243 (Del. 1997), In re Brodoway, 854 A. 2d 1158 (Del. 2004) and In re Callaway, 760 A. 2d 162 (Del 2000).

This case highlights the importance of keeping the client informed, as well as keeping client matters up to date. The multiple violations could have been avoided by staying in contact with the client. Rule 1.4 (a) (3) requires that “a lawyer keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter.” If the attorney would have followed this rule, he would have been more up to date on the client’s file, thus preventing the other violation.