On Wednesday, November 9, 2022, the Supreme Court of the State of Montana suspended attorney Anthony D. Platt for inappropriate communication with the client.

The case is entitled “In the matter of Anthony D. Platt” and was brought by the Office of the Disciplinary Counsel with case no. 22-0416.

The charges cited Montana Rules of Professional Conduct 1.16 and 8.4(b) which state:

Failing to withdraw his representation of the client when his ability to represent her ‘was impaired by his physical or mental condition or for other good cause.

Misconduct as evidenced by his conviction for Official Misconduct.

The Rules of Professional Conduct can be found here.

In the formal complaint dated, August 2, 2022, it was alleged that the respondent engaged in inappropriate communication in pursuit of a romantic relationship with a client whom he represented in a dependent-neglect proceeding.

The filing states:

“While Respondent had been her attorney since April, personal and unwanted communications began around June 18, 2020. A.B. had not given Respondent her address or asked him to come to her home, but he made multiple unannounced stops at her house. Based on his messages (i.e., texting her windows were broken, etc.), she believed he had driven by her house more often than she knew. Respondent even brought her a coffee and had flowers delivered”

The filing continues:

“On one occasion, Respondent pulled A.B. into him to kiss her forehead. She communicated to him she did not want, nor was she ready for a 3 relationship, and that she only wanted Respondent to be her attorney. A.B. became 4 anxious over his behaviors and feared he would not represent her if she avoided him, 5 and generally became fearful of Respondent.”

In response to said allegations, the respondent filed an Answer on August 29, 2022. He denied that such text messages were not about the substance of representation.

The filing further states:

“Respondent denies knowledge or information as to A.B.’s estimates respecting the number of text messages exchanged. Respondent denies () that such messages numbered between 5 and 10 per day, and (ii) that such messages were not about the substance of the representation. Respondent states that the overwhelming majority of such communications were about the substance of the representation. Further; the Respondent denies any knowledge that the messages were “unwanted” in that A.B. reciprocated all such communications and told the Respondent that she liked and appreciated those communications.”

The filing additionally notes:

“Respondent denies that his version and A.B.’s version of events were “nearly identical.” At no time was Respondent aware that his advances were unwanted or unwelcome, or that she was in any way frightened or intimidated by Respondent. When Respondent told A.B. that he was strongly inclined to withdraw from her case the evening immediately preceding A.B.s complaint, A.B. implored Respondent not to withdraw. Respondent was conflicted about withdrawing because he believed that he could still represent A.B. zealously and capably, was very familiar with the case, and there were impending and important court dates that needed to be covered.”

Despite the respondent’s request that the allegations be dismissed, believing that his actions did not damage the client’s legal case in any material respect, the respondent tendered to the Commission on Practice his conditional admission and affidavit of consent, which the court later approved. Thus, entering an order on the agreed-upon discipline.

The Disposition states:

“The Commission’s Recommendation that we accept Lawellin’s Rule 26 tendered admission is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED. Courtney Lawellin is hereby suspended from the practice of law in Montana for a period of 30 days, effective thirty days from the date of this Order. Lawellin is directed to give notice of her suspension to all clients she represents in pending matters, any co-counsel in pending matters, all opposing counsel and self-represented opposing parties in pending matters, and all courts in which she appears as counsel of record in pending matters, as required by MRLDE.”

Mr. Platt is licensed in Montana.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.