Mass.Gov home  home get things done agencies Search Mass.Gov

Commonwealth of Massachusetts

NO. BD-2000-046


S.J.C. Judgment of Indefinite Suspension entered by Justice Greaney on June 5, 2002.1


On April 6, 2000, the respondent was arraigned in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts on charges of tax evasion in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201. He was released on personal recognizance subject to the statutory conditions that he not commit any offense of federal, state, or local law. On August 11, 2000, the federal court amended the respondent’s conditions of release to require that the respondent engage in securities trading only with ready funds.

On July 25, 2000, the respondent was temporarily suspended from the practice of law. On August 21, 2000, the respondent opened a trading account at TD Waterhouse by means of an application that identified his occupation as an “Attorney”. On September 18, 2000, the federal court found that the respondent had violated the conditions of release. The court further amended the conditions to include provisions of home detention with electronic monitoring, prohibiting the respondent from trading securities, permitting the respondent to attend a gambling addiction program, and requesting that the respondent’s wife monitor the respondent’s telephone calls so that the respondent “does not trade.”

On December 18, 2000, the respondent was convicted of three counts of tax evasion in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 7201. He was sentenced to prison for a year and a day.

The respondent’s criminal conduct violated Canon One, Disciplinary Rule 1-102(A)(4) and (6), and Mass. R. Prof. C. 8.4(b), (c), and (h). His conduct in falsely identifying his position as an attorney, in holding himself out as a lawyer in violation of the order of temporary suspension, and in violating the conditions of release ordered by the federal court violation Mass. R. Prof. C. 8.4(c), (d), and (h).

On March 14, 2001, bar counsel filed a petition for discipline. On April 2, 2002, the respondent filed an answer admitting the above facts, and the parties stipulated that an indefinite suspension without retroactivity was an appropriate sanction. The Board of Bar Overseers approved the parties’ stipulation on May 13, 2002. On May 29, 2002, the Board of Bar Overseers filed an Information with the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County recommending that the respondent be indefinitely suspended effective the date of entry of the order. On June 5, 2002, the county court entered an order of indefinite suspension.

1 The complete Order of the Court is available by contacting the Clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court for Suffolk County.

2 Compiled by the Board of Bar Overseers based on the record before the Court.

BBO/OBC Privacy Policy. Please direct all questions to
© 2001. Board of Bar Overseers. Office of Bar Counsel. All rights reserved.