ParfumGigi@aol.com

Thu, 19 Oct 2006 22:49:20 EDT

Lawyer, Feared Dead, Is Alive and Practicing
John Council
Texas Lawyer
October 19, 2006

Mike Getz couldn't believe it when he learned on Oct. 9 that Houston solo William Britton "Britt" Hall was alive, had an active law license and was working as a lawyer in Conroe, Texas.

Getz believed Hall had walked away from his practice in early January and feared Hall may have died. So Getz and other lawyers had called the State Bar of Texas, worried that the clients they'd referred to Hall had been abandoned. Some of those clients suffered default judgments as a result, says Getz, a Beaumont, Texas, solo who was friends with Hall.

Hall had not been seen at his Houston office for nearly three months, according to Commission for Lawyer Discipline v. William Britton Hall, when the disciplinary arm of the State Bar took the unusual step of filing an application to assume jurisdiction over Hall's bankruptcy and business litigation practice on March 21.

Bar disciplinary attorneys convinced 129th District Court Judge Grant Dorfman they should be allowed to assume Hall's practice and should be granted access to the 130 case files in his office under Rule 13.02 of the Texas Rules of Disciplinary Procedure on March 31. That rule allows the Bar to assume a lawyer's practice in the interest of protecting clients, by recovering the clients' files and notifying them that they need to find new counsel.

Yet just more than month after the Bar began assisting Hall's Houston clients, Hall was back practicing law again.

Rigby Owen III, a Conroe solo, says he hired Hall on May 1 to represent criminal defense and family law clients. Owen says he was aware that Hall had suffered from personal and professional troubles when he hired him. Owen says he gave Hall a fresh start by paying off $350 in past Bar dues.

That action reinstated Hall's law license, which had been suspended administratively on Sept 1. 2005, according to Bar records. By the second week in May, Hall's license was restored, Owen says.

"I'm shocked and astonished and appalled," say Getz, who learned from a friend that Hall was back in business.

It was a turn of events no one involved in Hall's assumption case saw coming, either. Even Dorfman, the judge, and John Neal, chief disciplinary counsel for the Bar, didn't know Hall had an active law license until last week.

"How does that happen?" Dorfman asks.

Lawyers who have their practices assumed by the Bar usually never return to the profession, according to three attorneys who handle disciplinary cases. Sometimes they have died, become incapacitated or been sent to prison, they say.

Hall says a bout with depression caused him to walk away from his practice and move to Conroe. He says the depression kept him from contacting clients to advise them he was leaving.

"Part of the reason was I just wasn't capable," Hall says. "I did not handle this well, no. But at the same time I was so deeply depressed I couldn't handle it. Even now, I don't sleep well at night because I worry about what I've done."

For months, he worked as a paralegal for a Conroe family attorney, he says. Hall says he wasn't aware that anyone was looking for him until aTexas Lawyer article about him appeared in April. Afterwards, Hall says he contacted Bar officials and assisted them in returning clients' files.

"I understand that I've let a lot of people down," says Hall, who confirms there is a Bar disciplinary action pending against him. "I felt bad that I left my clients in the lurch. And I'm trying to get those things rectified to the extent that they can be,''

Part of the reason he returned to practicing law is so he can repay the clients whose cases he abandoned, he says.

"You have to understand, also, as part of the grievance process I'm going to have to pay these people back," says Hall, who estimates he owes clients up to $20,000 in restitution. "Frankly, I need to work and make a living in order to be able to pay these people back. And almost everything I make is being saved to pay these people back."

Hall says a doctor is currently treating his depression.

Asked if he thought the Bar should have suspended his license immediately after he abandoned his practice, Hall says: "Perhaps that's what they should have done, but that's not what happened."

It shocks Getz that Hall is allowed to have a law license after he abandoned clients.

"I thought, 'You've got to be kidding.' And I got on the Bar Web site, and sure enough, it was true. So I called him," Getz says. "I told him that I thought he owed me an explanation for dropping off the face of the Earth and leaving me with a bunch of clients that I'd referred to him looking for him. And he said he wasn't ready to give me an explanation and that he would send me a letter."

Jim Griffin, a Beaumont business owner, says he suffered a $5,613.62 default judgment on May 23 because Hall didn't show up to represent him in a property dispute that was removed to U.S. Bankruptcy Court.

"I couldn't get my records, so I couldn't get an attorney to represent me," Griffin says. "And by the time I found out that Britt wasn't going to represent me, I couldn't get another attorney.''

Last week, Griffin also searched Hall's law license information on the Bar Web site and discovered Hall had an active law license.

"For the life of me, I can't understand why the State Bar would let him continue practicing law,'' Griffin says.

It's rare that the Bar takes the drastic step of assuming a lawyer's practice, a maneuver that only happens a handful of times a year, says John Neal, chief disciplinary counsel for the Bar. The procedure is not a disciplinary action, he says.

Rule 13.02 provides that if a lawyer has "died, disappeared or become disabled," among other things, the Bar can examine the lawyer's files, return those files to clients and notify clients, opposing counsel, courts and other agencies that the lawyer had ceased practice. But the rule says nothing about what should happen if the lawyer resumes practicing.

The turn of events in Hall's case is of concern to the Bar, Neal says.

"If someone has abandoned the practice and left his clients without any kind of protection and we found out that this person was practicing law, that is something that would concern us and is something that we would look at," Neal says.

Hall's attorney, Steve Lee, declined to comment. Lee is a partner in Austin, Texas' Lione & Lee who represents Hall and made an appearance on Hall's behalf in the assumption case in May, after the Bar had assumed Hall's practice.

Neal, chief disciplinary counsel for the Bar, says there is little he can say about Hall's disciplinary status or why Hall still has an active law license more than six months after the Bar took over his Houston practice. Confidentiality rules surrounding disciplinary actions prevent him from discussing if the Bar is even taking action against Hall, Neal says.

"The assumption rule doesn't include an automatic suspension of a license," Neal says. "And whether or not Mr. Hall's license is eventually suspended or any other action is taken is something that I can't discuss."

A June 5 supplemental order signed by Dorfman after Hall resurfaced ordered Hall to turn over other client files he may have had in his possession.

Dorfman is not sure whether he had the authority to order Hall not to practice law as part of the assumption process.

"I did assume that a disciplinary action had been instituted and hadn't been adjudicated," Dorfman says. "Certainly, this warrants looking into. That's my concern: that someone is looking into this. And I don't want to prejudge the outcome of that."

What should happen next to Hall is a matter of debate among several Texas lawyers who handle disciplinary matters -- none of whom have ever heard of such a situation.

Robert Hinton, a Dallas criminal defense lawyer who also defends lawyers in disciplinary cases, says the Bar could seek a rare interim suspension of Hall's license, now that he's practicing again.

Under disciplinary Rule 14.01, the Bar can go to a district court and seek an injunction that prevents an attorney from practicing if the lawyer "poses a substantial threat to clients or prospective clients."

"If the guy has abandoned the practice and left everybody in the lurch, it would seem to me that the presumption would be that he is not able to practice law. And that is what the mechanism is all about,'' says Hinton of Robert Hinton & Associates. "It would seem to me that it would be the perfect time for the Bar to pursue this emergency remedy and knock you out.''

To prove a lawyer like Hall deserves an interim suspension under 14.01 might be difficult, says Linda Acevedo, first assistant disciplinary counsel for the Bar. The Bar would have to prove under Rule 14.02(c) that "any other conduct by the attorney that, if continued, will probably cause harm to the clients or prospective clients."

"I just don't know if it would fit the elements of what the rule is saying -- that we think he would go out and do X," Acevedo says. "But I don't know. I would have to think about that."

Randy Johnston, a Dallas malpractice lawyer and partner in Dallas' Johnston & Tobey, says the Bar would be wise to at least consider an interim suspension for Hall.

"The magnitude of what he did is huge. Abandoning clients should never be taken lightly," Johnston says. "But the mere fact that his life had circumstances that caused him to do that in the past doesn't mean that he'll do that again. But it ought to be looked at."

James McCormack, a former Bar general counsel and partner in Austin's Tomblin Carnes McCormack, believes it's possible that a court could order any new case files that Hall acquires to be turned over to the Bar, because the assumption order is still under effect.

"I think they can be acquired, because whatever he's doing is under that assumption order," McCormack says. "It would be an interesting question of perhaps first impression whether the court that issued the assumption order could prevent him from representing clients and could hold him in contempt if he does."

But Rigby Owen III says the clients that Hall works with all contract with Owen. "They're my clients. They're signing on with me," says Owen, who adds that Hall is an associate with his law office. "And he's acting at my behest. He'll do the mundane things like the actual plea work.''

Dorfman says that issue is not currently in front of him and he cannot comment on it.

"I don't think that that question has ever come up before. It hasn't been settled, of course," Neal says. "But there's definitely the argument that his practice has been assumed and is under control by this court under this court order."

State Sen. Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock, who is a partner in Lubbock's Crenshaw Dupree & Milam, says the Bar has a good track record of dealing with lawyers who have emotional problems through the disciplinary process. And while Hall's situation presents the Bar with an unusual problem, it probably doesn't warrant the Legislature altering the disciplinary code.

"There needs to be some evidence to rehabilitation of whatever caused the problem, and there needs to be supervision. It's not the kind of thing that you make one mistake and you can never practice again," Duncan says. "This world is a pretty tough place, but it doesn't excuse this kind of conduct, and I think the bar should be pretty high to get back in."

Hall's boss, Owen, says he's supervising Hall's work closely and talks with him several times a day. "I tell him, 'Go to court, and if you have any problems let me know,'" Owen says.

Hall is bright and has a nose for procedure and statutory law, according to Owen. And Owen believes Hall should be allowed to continue practicing law.

"He feeds off this. He really would be in bad shape if he doesn't have something like this," Owen says. "He shouldn't be a solo practitioner. But he should be a lawyer."

And Hall says he won't abandon a client again.

"I don't want that to happen again. I want somebody to be here with me," Hall says. "I don't want the State Bar to be worried about that happening."