In re Reger

421 P.3d 25
CourtAlaska Supreme Court
DecidedApril 6, 2018
DocketSupreme Court No. S-16921
StatusPublished

This text of 421 P.3d 25 (In re Reger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alaska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Reger, 421 P.3d 25 (Ala. 2018).

Opinion

Bar Counsel for the Alaska Bar Association and attorney Lawrence F. Reger entered into a stipulation for discipline by consent that would result in a six-month suspension from the practice of law, nine hours of specific continuing legal education as a condition prior to seeking reinstatement to the practice of law, and payment of $1,000 in costs. The Bar Association's Disciplinary Board approved the stipulation and now recommends that we do so as well. The facts of Reger's misconduct are set forth in the stipulation, which is attached as an appendix.1 We take these facts as true,2 and we apply our independent judgment to the sanctions' appropriateness.3

Based on the stipulated facts we agree with the legal analysis-set out in the stipulation-that the agreed upon sanctions are appropriate for Reger's misconduct. Accordingly,

Lawrence F. Reger is suspended from the practice of law for six months, required to *27complete six hours of CLE regarding law office management and three hours of legal ethics as a condition prior to seeking reinstatement to the practice of law, and shall pay $1,000 to the Alaska Bar Association within 60 days from entry of this order for disciplinary costs and fees incurred in this case.

This order is effective 30 days after issuance pursuant to Alaska Bar Rule 28(c).

Entered by direction of the court.

Appendix

BEFORE THE ALASKA BAR ASSOCIATION

DISCIPLINARY BOARD

In The Disciplinary Matter Involving

LAWRENCE F. REGER,

Respondent.

ABA Membership No. 9811081

ABA File No. 2014D183, 2014D223

Pursuant to Alaska Bar Rule 22(h), Lawrence F. Reger, Respondent, by and through counsel, Jason A. Weiner, and Louise Driscoll, Assistant Bar Counsel, stipulate as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Reger was at all times pertinent, an attorney at law admitted to practice by the Supreme Court of Alaska, and a member of the Alaska Bar Association. At all times relevant, Reger practiced law in Fairbanks, Fourth Judicial District, Alaska. On April 22, 2016, the Alaska Supreme Court suspended Reger for non-payment of 2016 Bar dues. Reger remains on administrative suspension.

2. Reger is, and was at all times pertinent, subject to the Alaska Rules of Professional Conduct ("ARPCs") and to Part II, Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement, Alaska Bar Rules, giving the Alaska Supreme Court and the Disciplinary Board of the Bar jurisdiction to resolve this matter.

BACKGROUND FACTS

3. In late 2014 Bar Counsel opened two disciplinary grievances against Reger for investigation. The following facts will describe Reger's law practice and his law practice management which led to the professional misconduct depicted in the two grievances.

4. Reger was admitted to the practice of law in Alaska in November 1998. In 2006 or 2007, while sharing offices in Fairbanks with several other attorneys, he decided to hire a legal assistant. After interviewing several persons, he hired KW because she communicated well and had excellent organizational skills.

5. Initially KW was assigned simple tasks, including making copies and answering telephone calls. She arrived early and stayed late at the office. She was friendly with co-workers, but task-oriented. Over time KW revealed an eye for detail and a willingness to seek clarification if she was uncertain about a task. Reger was most impressed that KW would report when she made a mistake which allowed corrective measures to be promptly taken.

6. In response to her proven abilities, Reger assigned her more complex tasks, such as drafting simple letters, calendaring deadlines, drafting Civil Rule 90.3 child support guidelines, drafting Civil Rule 26.1 disclosures in domestic relations cases, and preparing trial exhibits.

7. KW became a key part of Reger's successful practice which he likened to a well-oiled machine. KW made copies, prepared routine non-substantive motions such as requests for extension of time, and was the primary point of contact for clients on all non-substantive matters. Reger dealt with substantive matters, drafted motions, and reviewed and formulated discovery. Reger held KW in high regard because she was conscientious and hard-working and she demonstrated a caring nature toward the firm's clients.

8. After several years, other lawyers in the office suite relocated. The space was too expensive for Reger to maintain so he entered a different office-sharing arrangement with different attorneys.

9. Around this time KW left the state with her military spouse who had been transferred to a new duty station. The attorneys *28in the new office suite had difficulty in finding and maintaining competent staff. One day KW called to say her husband was retiring from the military and the family was returning to Alaska. Reger offered her a job on the spot and she accepted.

10. KW returned to work in late 2011. She adjusted quickly to working with three different attorneys with quite different practices. After one of the attorneys relocated, KW continued to work with Reger and the other lawyer in the office suite.

11. During the summer of 2013, the other attorney's behavior began to change. He became short-tempered and often didn't show up at the office. KW reported the attorney's clients were becoming increasingly upset. Reger and KW began to discuss moving to another location due to the stressful situation.

12. In the late summer of 2013, Reger tried to make a phone call and discovered his office line was disconnected. He learned the telephone bills had gone unpaid.

13. Under the office-sharing arrangement, Reger paid one-half of the total office overhead, including the telephone bill, to the other attorney who appeared not to be applying those funds to the service providers. From his perspective Reger was current with his bills, but he paid $3,200 to the phone company that day to have his phone service restored.

14. Learning about the overdue telephone bill prompted a call to the landlord and Reger learned that office rent had not been paid in several months. Reger was subletting from the other attorney, and was not a party to the primary rental agreement, but he brought his portion of the rent current to avoid immediate eviction.

15. Reger realized that bringing the bills current did not solve the problem. He and KW decided to move to a new office despite the time and expense associated with a move.

16. Most available office space in downtown Fairbanks was for more space than he needed and more money than he could afford. A former client learned that Reger was looking for office space and called with a proposal. The client's wife owned a duplex with a mother-in-law apartment that had been used for an office before. It was small but conveniently located so it met Reger's needs.

17. Reger had a significant cash-flow problem because he had to bring a number of bills current on little notice. To help fund the office move, KW offered to loan Reger $16,000 from a personal injury settlement he had recently obtained on her behalf.

18. Reger and KW discussed the proposal at length.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In the Disciplinary Matter Involving Schuler
818 P.2d 138 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1991)
In the Disciplinary Matter Involving Buckalew
731 P.2d 48 (Alaska Supreme Court, 1987)
Disciplinary Matter Involving Shea
273 P.3d 612 (Alaska Supreme Court, 2012)
In the Disciplinary Matter Involving Miles
339 P.3d 1009 (Alaska Supreme Court, 2014)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
421 P.3d 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-reger-alaska-2018.