On September 23, 2022, the Supreme Court of New Jersey ordered the censure of Houston attorney Scott Garyt Hunziker for misconduct.

The case is styled ‘In the Matter of Scott Garyt Hunziker’ was brought by the Office of Attorney Ethics.

The charges cited Rules of Professional Conduct specifically RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence), RPC 1.4(b) (failure to communicate with a client), RPC 5.5(a)(1) (unauthorized practice of law), and RPC 8.4(d) (conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice).

The Rules of Professional Conduct can be found here.

The following are as alleged and summarized from the filing:

The respondent is the Managing Partner of the Voss Law Firm, PC (the Voss Firm) specialized in representing policyholders as plaintiffs in actions against insurance companies that had denied coverage under their policies. On December 12, 2012, the Voss Firm began representing New Jersey policyholders who had suffered from Superstorm Sandy. Due to the increasing number of clients, the Voss firm retained local counsel to serve as lead attorneys on the Superstorm Sandy matters.

The complaints filed in the state court were signed by Levasseur as “Local Counsel for the Plaintiff” and by the respondent as “Pro Hac Vice Pending.” Those filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, were signed by Levasseur as “Attorney-in-Charge,” and the accompanying civil cover sheets identified respondent as attorney of record. Unbeknownst to the respondent, Levasseur had not filed any pro hac vice applications on behalf of the respondent in either New Jersey or federal courts.

It was only on November 2013, that respondent was admitted to the New Jersey Bar after passing the July 2013 bar exam, and by this time, relevant Superstorm Sandy complaints had already been filed under respondent’s signature or his designation as attorney of record.

The complaint alleged that Respondent engaged in the misconduct by his mishandling of the New Jersey state and federal cases which resulted in their dismissal and the imposition of sanctions in both state and federal courts, and by failing to notify the New Jersey clients of the status of their cases. Respondent also engaged in misconduct by signing complaints in New Jersey federal and state courts and identifying himself as plaintiff’s counsel when he knew that he was not admitted either on a pro hac vice basis or as a member of the New Jersey bar. Moreover, by his mishandling of the Superstorm Sandy cases.

The Office of Attorney Ethics recommended the imposition of reprimand.

The Decision of the Disciplinary Review Board states that:

“This matter was before us on a disciplinary stipulation between the Office of Attorney Ethics (OAE)and respondent. Respondent stipulated to having violated RPC 1.3 (lack of diligence);RPC 1.4(b) (failure to communicate with the client); RPC5.5(a)(1) (unauthorized practice of law); and RPC 8.4(d)(conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice).

For the reasons set forth below, we determine to impose a censure.”

With the foregoing facts and discussions, the court ruled against the Respondent in relation to the above-cited Rules of Professional Conduct.

The Disposition reads:

“It is ORDERED that Scott Garyt Hunziker is hereby censured; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided inRule1:20-17.”

As of today, Mr. Hunziker is listed in Zerbe, Miller, Fingeret, Frank, Jadav & Hunziker, LLP as a partner. He has been licensed in New Jersey, as well as in Missouri, Kansas, Texas and Georgia. Hunziker graduated from the University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law in 2000. His info can be found on LinkedIn.

A copy of the original filing can be found here.