Office of Diciplinary Counsel v. Agard
This text of Office of Diciplinary Counsel v. Agard (Office of Diciplinary Counsel v. Agard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Hawaii Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCAD-12-0001034 05-FEB-2013 09:05 AM SCAD-12-00001034
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,
vs.
KEONI K. AGARD, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING (ODC 10-051-8885, 10-078-8912, 11-076-9000, 12-006-9022)
ORDER OF SUSPENSION (By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of
the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of
Hawai#i, the stipulated facts, and the evidence in the record, it
appears that Respondent Keoni K. Agard deposited client funds
directly into a business account that was not an approved IOLTA
account, thereby commingling client funds with his own, allowed
the balance in the account to fall below the sum covered by the
deposited client funds, thereby misappropriating client funds,
failed to timely refund one client’s retainer, and negotiated an
agreement with the same client for a refund in exchange for the
withdrawal of the client’s complaint lodged with the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel, thereby violating Rules 1.15(c), 1.15(d), 1.15(f)(4), and 8.3(d)(2)(i) of the Hawai#i Rules of Professional
Conduct (HRPC). In aggravation, this court finds Respondent
Agard has substantial experience in the practice of law, and
committed multiple ethical violations in the present matter. In
mitigation, we find an absence of a dishonest or selfish motive
in Agard’s conduct, and note his clean disciplinary record, his
sincere expressions of remorse, his full and free disclosure
concerning the circumstances surrounding his misconduct, his
timely good faith efforts to rectify the consequences of his
misconduct, and his strong reputation for community service.
Therefore, in light of the significant mitigating factors and the
appropriateness of some period of suspension,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Keoni K. Agard is
suspended from the practice of law in this jurisdiction for a
period of 30 days, effective 30 days after the date of entry of
this order, as provided by Rules 2.3(a)(2) and 2.16(c) of the
Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i (RSCH).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Agard shall
submit to this court within 90 days after the date of entry of
this order proof of completion of a financial practices course
and audit conducted by the Practicing Attorneys Liability
Management Society.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, in addition to any other
requirements for reinstatement imposed by the Rules of the
2 Supreme Court of the State of Hawai#i, Respondent Agard shall pay
all costs of these proceedings as approved upon the timely
submission of a bill of costs, as prescribed by RSCH Rule 2.3(c).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Agard shall,
within ten days after the effective date of his suspension, file
with this court an affidavit in full compliance with RSCH Rule
2.16(d).
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 5, 2013.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr. /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Office of Diciplinary Counsel v. Agard, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-diciplinary-counsel-v-agard-haw-2013.