In the Matter of Joel M. Ward (Review Dept. 1992) 2 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 47
Facts
Attorney Joel M. Ward, admitted to practice in California in 1971, faced two disciplinary matters. In the Kranjc matter, Ward received over $18,000 in client funds from prior counsel to be held in trust. He deposited the money only after trial and began using the funds without the client’s consent, misappropriating more than $12,000. Despite continued client payments and demands, Ward failed to refund the excess balance and delayed returning the client’s file. In the West matter, Ward represented a personal injury client but failed to communicate adequately and allowed the five-year statute for trial to lapse due to a calendaring error.
Charges and Findings
The hearing judge found Ward culpable of grossly negligent misappropriation in violation of Business & Professions Code §6106 and former Rule 8-101(B)(4), and of failure to communicate under §6068(m). The court rejected allegations of dishonesty, concluding Ward’s conduct reflected serious neglect rather than intent to defraud. The Review Department affirmed most findings and increased the actual suspension from 60 to 90 days, while reducing probation from four to three years.
Sanctions Table
| Violation | Findings | Mitigation | Aggravation | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Misappropriation of $12,000 (Kranjc matter) | Used trust funds without consent; failed to return balance after repeated demands. | 20 years practice with no discipline; remorse; cooperation; strong character evidence; family hardship. | Multiple acts; prolonged breach of fiduciary duty; harm to client requiring new counsel. | Gross negligence amounting to moral turpitude; §6106 and Rule 8-101(B)(4) violations. |
| Failure to communicate (West matter) | Ignored client’s calls; lacked office system to relay messages. | Heavy caseload; personal stress; insight gained; apology offered. | Client’s case lost due to inaction and missed deadline. | Violation of §6068(m); aggravation for harm. |
| Failure to perform competently | Missed trial deadline from calendaring mistake; court deemed inadvertent, not reckless. | No prior record; extensive preparation; client cooperation. | Moderate harm from lost claim. | No additional discipline; treated as communication failure. |
| Restitution and Remorse | Restitution made years later after disciplinary proceedings began. | Recognized need for reform; testimony of honesty and diligence from peers. | Delay in restitution reduced mitigating value. | Mitigation found but discounted. |
| Final Discipline | Gross negligence in client fund handling and communication failures. | Good character; long unblemished career; partial restitution. | Multiple acts; client harm. | Three-year stayed suspension, 90-day actual suspension, three years probation, Rule 955 compliance. |
Holding and Significance
The Review Department held that gross negligence in handling client funds constitutes moral turpitude under §6106 even absent intent to defraud. Ward’s repeated trust account deficiencies and failure to refund overpayments showed a breach of fiduciary duty requiring suspension. His failure to communicate also violated §6068(m), though his calendaring mistake was not deemed reckless. The decision emphasized the need for attorneys to maintain trust account records and effective communication systems to safeguard client interests.
Tags
Citation: In the Matter of Joel M. Ward (Review Dept. 1992) 2 Cal. State Bar Ct. Rptr. 47.