Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Hartford

Supreme Court of Montana

January 16, 2020

IN THE MATTER OF BRANDON HARTFORD, An Attorney at Law, Respondent.

          Jon G. Moog Deputy Disciplinary Counsel Office of Disciplinary Counsel

          COMPLAINT

         Upon leave of the Commission on Practice ("Commission") granted on January 8, 2020, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") hereby charges Brandon Hartford, an attorney at law admitted to practice before the courts of Montana, with professional misconduct as follows:

         GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

         1. Brandon Hartford, hereinafter referred to as Respondent, was admitted to the practice of law in the State of Montana in 2004, at which time he took the oath required for admission, agreeing 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.

          2. The Montana Supreme Court has approved and adopted the Montana Rules of Professional Conduct ("MRPC"), governing the ethical conduct of attorneys licensed to practice law in the State of Montana, which Rules were in effect at all times mentioned in this Complaint.

         COUNT ONE

         3. ODC re-alleges paragraphs 1 and 2 of the general allegations within Count One.

         4. On September 3, 2019, ODC received a grievance alleging Respondent engaged in unethical conduct while representing a client, Nathan Jackson ("Jackson"). The grievance was docketed as ODC File No. 19-089.

         5. In the normal course of procedure, ODC forwarded the grievance to Respondent for his response by letters dated September 23, 2019, and October 17, 2019. Respondent's office received the latter certified letter on October 21, 2019.

         6. To date, Respondent has failed to provide any response to the grievance. 7. By his refusal to provide any response, Respondent has repeatedly violated Rule 8.1(b), MRPC.

         8. Rule 8A(6), MRLDE, provides additional grounds for discipline for Respondent's failure to promptly and fully respond to ODC's inquiries.

         COUNT TWO

         9. ODC re-alleges paragraphs 1 and 2 of the general allegations and paragraphs 4 through 6 of Count One within Count Two.

         10. Jackson retained Respondent on April 10, 2018, to represent him regarding traffic citations he ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.