LAWYER DISCIPLINE
NOTICE OF ORDER ON ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE In the Matter of Reciprocal Discipline of Joseph D . Roach , a Member of the Bar of the State of North Dakota No . 20230233
The North Dakota Supreme Court considered the report of a hearing panel of the Disciplinary Board recommending reciprocal discipline of a reprimand based on misconduct representing a client in a divorce . Effective December 7 , 2022 , the Minnesota Supreme Court reprimanded and placed Joseph D . Roach on probation with conditions for two years based on misconduct representing a client in a divorce . The Supreme Court accepted the Disciplinary Board ’ s recommendation and reprimanded Roach . Roach was placed on probation in North Dakota with conditions for two years .
NOTICE OF ORDER ON ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota , Petitioner v . Stephen J . Baird , Respondent No . 20230277
The North Dakota Supreme Court considered the report of a hearing panel of the Disciplinary Board recommending Stephen J . Baird be disbarred from the practice of law in North Dakota and refund clients in the amount of $ 2,000 .
On August 14 , 2023 , the hearing panel filed default findings of fact , conclusions of law , and recommendations for discipline . The hearing panel found that Baird was retained for $ 2,000 to represent a client in an immigration matter . Baird was hired to represent the client on an I-360 green card petition . The I-360 petition was based on violence against the client and must be filed within two years from when a divorce is finalized . Baird failed to communicate with the client . When the client was able to reach Baird , the client stated Baird knowingly misrepresented the status of the case . He did not monitor the case and did not notify the client of filings . Baird did not respond to a request for evidence , which led to denial of the client ’ s petition . Baird failed to notify the client of the denial of the petition . Baird ’ s failure to notify U . S . Citizenship and Immigration Services of his new office address caused a delay in receiving the denial of the petition and notification to the client . Despite requests , the client did not receive a copy of his file or refund of the fee .
The hearing panel concluded Baird ’ s conduct violated N . D . R . Prof . Conduct 1.3 , Diligence , by failing to act with reasonable diligence and promptness ; 1.4 , Communication , by failing to keep the client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and by failing to respond to reasonable requests for information ; and 1.16 ( e ), Declining or Terminating Representation , by failing to take reasonable steps to protect the client ’ s interests by providing a complete copy of the client file or return any unearned fees to the client .
The Supreme Court disbarred Baird from the practice of law , effective immediately ; ordered him to pay restitution of $ 2,000 to the client ; and repay the client protection fund for any amounts paid on Baird ’ s behalf .
NOTICE OF ORDER ON ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota , Petitioner v . Mark J . Pilch , Respondent No . 20230268
The North Dakota Supreme Court considered the report of a hearing panel of the Disciplinary Board recommending Mark J . Pilch be disbarred from the practice of law in North Dakota , refund the client in the amount of $ 5,500 , and pay $ 250 in costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceeding .
Pilch was retained in November 2021 to represent a client in a divorce . The client experienced difficulty communicating with Pilch throughout the representation . Pilch failed to respond to or notify the client of a motion to compel discovery . The client was found in contempt and ordered to pay $ 1,500 . Pilch also failed to inform the client of or attend a status conference . Pilch did not complete the representation or refund any unearned portion of the retainer . Pilch also failed to provide the client with a copy of his file . The client was required to retain other counsel to complete the matter .
The hearing panel concluded Pilch ’ s conduct violated N . D . R . Prof . Conduct 1.3 , Diligence , by abandoning the client and not fulfilling the terms or accomplishing the objectives of the representation . Pilch failed to promptly respond to discovery requests , reply or otherwise comply with a motion to compel , and failed to attend scheduled hearings and conferences . The hearing panel concluded Pilch ’ s conduct violated N . D . R . Prof . Conduct 1.4 , Communication , by failing to make reasonable efforts to keep the client reasonably informed as to the status of the representation , his responsibilities therein , and the consequences as a result of Pilch ’ s failures ; and 1.16 , by failing to take reasonably practicable steps to protect the client ’ s interests , specifically , but not limited to provide notice of discontinuation of services , provision of a refund of unearned monies , and surrender property to which the client was entitled .
The Supreme Court disbarred Pilch from the practice of law , effective immediately ; ordered him to pay restitution of $ 5,500 to the client , pay costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceedings , and repay the client protection fund for any amounts paid on Pilch ’ s behalf .
NOTICE OF ORDER ON ATTORNEY DISCIPLINE Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of North Dakota , Petitioner v . Mark J . Pilch , Respondent No . 20230265-20230266
The North Dakota Supreme Court considered the report of a hearing panel of the Disciplinary Board recommending Mark J . Pilch be disbarred from the practice of law in North Dakota , refund the client in the amount of $ 1,250 , and pay $ 250 in costs and expenses of the disciplinary proceeding .
Two formal matters form the basis of the petition for discipline . In the first matter , Pilch was retained to represent a couple regarding a dispute with a neighbor . He agreed to draft a letter to the neighbor , but did not do so . Pilch did not respond to inquiries from the clients
32 THE GAVEL