AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

The respondent, a disbarred attorney, continued to hold himself out as a practicing lawyer and engaged in legal activities despite a prior disbarment order. He used letterhead identifying himself as a "retired" attorney and provided legal advice to clients, interfering with ongoing legal proceedings. He also failed to comply with court orders, including appearing at a scheduled hearing and fulfilling obligations under Rule 17-212, which required notifying clients and courts of his disbarment (paras 2-11).

Procedural History

• In re Herkenhoff, 116 N.M. 622, 866 P.2d 350 (1993): The respondent was suspended from practicing law for violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, but the suspension was deferred, and he was placed on supervised probation for 12 months (para 2).
• In re Herkenhoff, 119 N.M. 232, 889 P.2d 840 (1995): After failing to cooperate with his supervisor, the respondent's probation was revoked, and he was suspended. He was later disbarred effective January 4, 1995, and fined $1,540 for non-compliance with Rule 17-212 (paras 2-4).

Parties' Submissions

• Chief Disciplinary Counsel: Argued that the respondent violated the disbarment order by continuing to hold himself out as an attorney, engaging in legal practice, and failing to comply with court orders, including appearing at a scheduled hearing (paras 5-12).
• Respondent: Claimed he was retired and not subject to the disbarment order, provided legal services without remuneration due to client requests, and failed to attend the hearing due to a prior personal commitment (paras 18-19).

Legal Issues

• Whether the respondent violated the court's disbarment order by continuing to hold himself out as an attorney and engaging in the practice of law (paras 5-14).
• Whether the respondent's failure to appear at a scheduled hearing constituted contempt of court (paras 13-14).

Disposition

• The respondent was found in direct criminal contempt for violating the disbarment order and failing to appear at the hearing (paras 13-14).
• The respondent was sentenced to five months of incarceration, suspended on conditions, including compliance with the disbarment order and payment of fines and costs (paras 20-22).

Reasons

Per Joseph F. Baca, Chief Justice (Ransom and Franchini JJ. concurring):

The Court found that the respondent's actions, including using letterhead identifying himself as a "retired" attorney and providing legal advice, constituted a clear violation of the disbarment order. His interference in legal proceedings disrupted attorney-client relationships and increased litigation costs. The respondent's failure to appear at the hearing, despite receiving notice, further demonstrated contempt. The Court emphasized that disbarred attorneys cannot provide legal services, even without remuneration, and that personal commitments do not excuse non-appearance at court proceedings. The respondent's incarceration was suspended on conditions to ensure compliance with the disbarment order and court rules (paras 13-22).