Fall 2001, pg. 253. Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar DISCIPLINE.

Maine Bar Journal

2001.

Fall 2001, pg. 253.

Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar DISCIPLINE

Maine Bar JournalFall 2001Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar DISCIPLINEBoard of Overseers

v.

E. Christopher L'Hommedieu of Lewiston, Maine

Supreme Judicial Court

Docket No. Bar-01-03

Order

This matter came directly before the Court on October 23, 2001 pursuant to counsel's stipulated waiver of June 27, 2001 and the Court's Order of June 29, 2001. The Board of Overseers' of the Bar (the Board) was represented by Bar Counsel J. Scott Davis. The affected client, Andrew Gaillard, was not present, and Bar Counsel earlier provided his attorney, Jon Holder, Esq., with a copy of the parties' proposed resolution of this grievance matter and notice of this hearing date. Defendant E. Christopher L'Hommedieu, Esq. was present with his attorney, Peter J. DeTroy, III, Esq.

Stipulations

The parties have stipulated to the following material facts:

Mr. L'Hommedieu was admitted to practice in Maine in 1995 and has been practicing in Lewiston, Maine since 1997.

In the summer of 1999, Andrew Gaillard, whom Mr. L'Hommedieu had earlier represented on other matters, informed Mr. L'Hommedieu that he was pursuing a claim for Social Security disability benefits.

On or about October 15, 1999, Mr. Gaillard's claim for Social Security disability benefits was denied, whereupon Mr. L'Hommedieu agreed to assist him in the appeal of that decision.

In fact, however, Mr. L'Hommedieu did not timely file the required Petition for Reconsideration or take any other steps to pursue Mr. Gaillard's Social Security appeal.

Throughout 2000, Mr. Gaillard made a number of status inquiry telephone calls to which Mr. L'Hommedieu wrongly assured him that he had done all that could be done and that the responsibility for the delay was with the Social Security Administration.

In fact, at least by November 7, 2000, Mr. L'Hommedieu knew that the fault of the delay was his rather than the Social Security Administration, but he continued to mislead Mr. Gaillard. In November of 2000, Mr. L'Hommedieu personally visited the Social Security Administration Office in Lewiston and confirmed there was no Petition for Reconsideration in Mr. Gaillard's file. He never so advised Mr. Gaillard of that finding.

In January of 2001, Mr. L'Hommedieu went to the Social Security Administration Office and filed Mr. Gaillard's Petition for Reconsideration with required attachments. Mr. Gaillard's signatures contained on the Petition and other filed documents had been falsified and backdated by Mr. L'Hommedieu, by his photocopying of Mr. Gaillard's signatures from other documents onto those filed documents. By so doing...