Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Morikawa

CourtHawaii Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 19, 2010
Docket18999
StatusPublished

This text of Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Morikawa (Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Morikawa) 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.

Bluebook
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Morikawa, (haw 2010).

Opinion

NO. l8999

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAl‘L§ § I§M §§ OFFlCE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner: @; vs. §§ 35 GARY N. MORlKAWA, Respondent. $;_

-¢§

usi 523

ORIGINAL PROCEEDlNG (ODC 03-108-7708, 08-070-87l3)

. ORDER OF DISBARMENT (By: Moon, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, Duffy, and Recktenwald, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the Disciplinary Board’s Report

and Recommendation for the Disbarment of Gary N. Morikawa, the

openiHQ,.answering, and reply briefs,

and the testimony and exhibits in the record,

we adopt the Disciplinary Board’s Report

and Recommendation for disbarment. We find no merit in

Respondent Morikawa’s challenges to numerous findings and

conclusions, and the recommended discipline. The findings and

conclusions are supported by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent practiced while suspended pursuant to Rule 2.l2A of

the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of HawaiU, did not

timely provide clients’ documents to the clients, did not keep

required accounting records or properly account for them,

misappropriated clients’ funds,

filed false certifications with regard to accounting records,

failed to disclose his Rule 2.l2A

suspension to clients, failed to cooperate with investigations,

submitted false evidence, and engaged in other misconduct in

multiple violations of Rules l.4(a)

[5 times], l.4(b) l.5(a), l.6(a

[5 times], , l.7(b), l.8(h), l.l5(a)(l)

[3 times], l.l5(c) [9 ) [3 times], l.l5(f)(3) [6 times], l.l5(g)(2) [3 ) [3 times], l.l6(a)(l), l.l6(d) n (a), 8.l(a), 8.l(b), 8.4(a)

)

times], l.l5(d

times], l.l5(h [4 times], 3.4(e) 5

[5 times], 5. [32 times], 8.4(c) [7

times], and 8.4(d) of the Hawafi Rules of Professional Conduct.

Therefore, lT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Gary N. Morikawa

is disbarred from the practice of law in this jurisdiction. In that Morikawa is currently suspended pursuant to Rule 2.l2A, this order is effective immediately.

lT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Morikawa shall

pay all costs of this proceeding. DATED: Honolulu, HawaiUq July 19, 2010.

PLou4ptLl°7\HH4&Lj@J?w

(L/...@..c. s>-aa,¢%»

%?w»»¢-_ /Z¢»c,ww(#/

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Morikawa, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/office-of-disciplinary-counsel-v-morikawa-haw-2010.