IN THE MATTER OF JACK H. MORRIS, An Attorney at Law, Respondent. ODC File No. 16-172
Moog Deputy Disciplinary Counsel Office of Disciplinary
leave of the Commission on Practice granted on April 19,
2017, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel for the State of
Montana hereby charges Jack H. Morris with professional
misconduct as follows:
H. Morris, hereinafter referred to as Respondent, was
admitted to the practice of law in the State of Montana in
1991, at which time he took the oath required for admission,
wherein he agreed to abide by the Rules of Professional
Conduct, the Disciplinary Rules adopted by the Supreme Court,
and the highest standards of honesty, justice and morality,
including but not limited to, those outlined in parts 3 and 4
of Chapter 61, Title 37, Montana Code Annotated.
Montana Supreme Court has approved and adopted the Montana
Rules of Professional Conduct ("MRPC"), governing
the ethical conduct of attorneys licensed to practice in the
State of Montana, which Rules were in effect at all times
mentioned in this Complaint.
realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 2 of the
General Allegations as if fully restated in this Count One.
July 13, 2016, Respondent appeared with his client, John
Kebble, in Cascade County Justice Court Cause
TK-2007-0003495, at which time a jury trial and pretrial
deadlines were scheduled.
deadlines approached, the prosecutor on the case, Kenneth
Varnes, attempted to contact Respondent but was unable to
leave him phone messages, and Respondent did not respond to
Varnes confirmed Respondent's contact information on the
State Bar of Montana website, which listed his status as
"inactive, " which State Bar staff confirmed to him
by phone had been the case since April 2016.
Varnes advised the Justice Court of Respondent's inactive
status in his Motion to Set Status Hearing filed on October
3, 2016, and simultaneously submitted a Rule 8.3 report to
reflected in the Justice Court's Report of Action,
Respondent arrived late for the October 17, 2017 hearing on
Mr. Varnes' motion, after which the Judge went back into
the courtroom and advised Respondent that a status hearing
had been scheduled for October 25.
Respondent was previously notified by letter dated April 5,
2016 that the CLE Commission had directed the State Bar to
transfer him to inactive status for non-compliance with his
or about June 8, 2016, Respondent appeared at the State Bar
office and advised he was nearly ready to turn in his
compliance documentation. Respondent paid his dues but was
advised by State Bar staff that his ...