acbb7362-4fd5-470a-b9ff-b50973439134.pdf (2022)

Original PDF Document

---

Download Official Record (harrison-3219-order-of-reciprocal-discipline-1.pdf)

Go to Top

Alternative Accessible HTML

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE
AT NASHVILLE

03/03/2022

IN RE: IN RE: SIR ASHLEY JAMES HARRISON, BPR #027965
An Attorney Licensed to Practice Law in Tennessee
(Huntersville, North Carolina)
____________________________
No. M2022-00062-SC-BAR-BP
BOPR No. 2022-3219-0-DB-25
____________________________
ORDER OF RECIPROCAL DISCIPLINE
This matter is before the Court pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 25.2, upon a Notice
of Submission filed by the Board of Professional Responsibility (“Board”) consisting of a
certified copy of the December 8, 2015 Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Consent
Order of Discipline entered by the Disciplinary Hearing Commission of the North Carolina
State Bar, suspending Mr. Harrison for a period of five (5) years. (Exhibit A).
On January 21, 2022, this Court entered a Notice of Reciprocal Discipline requiring
Mr. Harrison to inform this Court within thirty (30) days of receipt of the Notice why
reciprocal discipline should not be imposed in Tennessee pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, §
25.4 or, in the absence of a response demonstrating the grounds set forth in Tenn. Sup. Ct. R.
9, § 25.4, the Supreme Court of Tennessee will impose a similar discipline with identical
terms and conditions based upon the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Consent
Order of Discipline entered by the North Carolina State Bar. This Court has received no
response from Mr. Harrison.
After careful consideration of the record in this matter, this Court finds, based upon
the particular facts of this case, that none of the elements in Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 25.4 exist.
As a result, it is appropriate to enter an Order of Reciprocal Discipline.
IT IS, THEREFORE, CONSIDERED, ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED
BY THE COURT THAT:
(1)

Sir Ashley James Harrison is suspended for five (5) years retroactive to
December 8, 2015.

(2)

Pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 31.3, Mr. Harrison shall pay to the Clerk of
this Court the costs incurred herein within ninety (90) days of the entry of this
Order, for all of which execution may issue if necessary.

(3)

Prior to seeking reinstatement, Mr. Harrison must have met all CLE
requirements; have remitted all outstanding registration fees and outstanding
professional privilege taxes, including those due from the date of this
suspension until the date of reinstatement; and have remitted all court costs in
this matter.

(4)

Mr. Harrison shall comply in all aspects with Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, §§ 28 and
30.4, regarding the obligations and responsibilities of suspended attorneys and
the procedure for reinstatement.

(5)

Pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 28.1, this Order shall be effective upon entry.

(6)

The Board of Professional Responsibility shall cause notice of this discipline
to be published as required by Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9, § 28.11.

PER CURIAM

2

BEFORE THE
ARY HEARING COMMISSION
OF THE
TIT CAROLINA STATE BAR
15 DIIC 46

STATE OF NORTH CAROL

WAKE COUNTY
\Po
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE
Plaintiff

FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,AND
CONSENT ORDER OF DISCIPLINE

v.
SIR ASHLEY J. HARRISON,Attorney,
Defendant

THIS MAI 1ER was considered by a hearing panel of the Disciplinary Hearing
Commission cornposed of Joshua W. Willey, Jr., Chair, Donald C. Prentiss, and Christopher
Bruffey pursuant to 27 N.C. Admin. Code 1B § .0114 of the Rules and Regulations of the
North Carolina State Bar. Plaintiff, the North Carolina State Bar, was represented by Brian
P.D. Oten and Maria J. Brown. Defendant, Sir Ashley J. Harrison, represented himself.
Defendant waives a formal hearing in this matter and both parties stipulate and consent to the
entry of this order and to the discipline imposed. Defendant waives any right to appeal this
consent order or to challenge in any way the sufficiency ofthe findings.
Based upon the consent of the parties, the hearing panel hereby makes by clear,
cogent, and convincing evidence the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
Plaintiff, the North Carolina State Bar ("State Bar"), is a body duly organized
under the laws of North Carolina and is the proper party to bring this proceeding under the
authority granted it in Chapter 84 ofthe General Statutes ofNorth Carolina, and the Rules and
Regulations of the North Carolina State Bar (Chapter 1 of Title 27 of the North Carolina
Administrative Code).
2.
Defendant, Sir Ashley J. Harrison ("Defendanr or "Harrison"), was admitted
to the North Carolina State Bar in 20,11 and is, and was at all times referred to herein, an
attorney at law licensed to practice in North Carolina, subject to the laws ofthe State ofNorth
Carolina, the Rules and Regulations of the North Carolina State Bar and the Rules of
Professional Conduct.
3.
During part ofthe relevant periods referred to herein, Harrison was engaged in
the practice of law in the State of North Carolina and maintained a law office in Charlotte,
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.

1 nlExhibit A

During part ofthe relevant periods referred to herein, Harrison was transferred
4.
to inactive status with the North Carolina State Bar by order of the Mecklenburg County
Superior Court dated 27 May 2014. Harrison was reinstated to active practice by order ofthe
Mecklenburg County Superior Court dated 23 September 2015.
5. Harrison was properly served with process and received due notice of the
hearing in this matter.
In January 2012, R.H. retained Harrison to represent her on a charge of driving
6.
while intoxicated in Cabarrus County,file no. 11 CR 56169.
7.

R.H.paid Harrison $450.00 for the representation.

Harrison failed to inform R.H. that a hearing had been scheduled in her case on
8.
9 May 2012 and that she was required to appear at this hearing.
9.
As a result of Harrison's failure to inform R.H. of the 9 May 2012 hearing,
R.H.failed to appear at the hearing and the judge issued an order for R.H.'s arrest.
10.
Harrison notified R.H. on 10 May 2012 that, because of her failure to appear,
thejudge had issued an order for her arrest.
11.

R,H.'s next court appearance was scheduled for 6 June 2012.

12.
On 23 May 2012, R.H. — who lived in Florida — emailed Harrison and asked
that he continue the 6 June 2012 hearing because she was going to be unable to travel to
North Carolina on that date.
13.
On 25 May 2012, Harrison filed a motion to have the hearing rescheduled for
20 June 2011
14.
On or about 1 June 2012, the Cabarrus County Clerk of Court's office notified
Harrison by telephone that there was th be no court on 20 June 2012 and that the hearing in
R.H.'s matter would occur on 25 June 2012.
15.

Harrison did not inform R.H. ofthe change to her court date.

16,
Believing that the hearing was still scheduled for 20 June 2012, R.H.
purchased a nonrefundable ticket for a round-trip flight between Orlando, Florida and
Charlotte,North Carolina so she could appear in court on 20 June 2012.
17. R.H. thereafter called Harrison and learned from him that the hearing was
taking place on 25 June 2012.
18.
R.H. did not appear at the 25 June 2012 hearing because she was unable to
afford to purchase another plane ticket. As a result, R.H. was called and failed and another
order for her arrest was issued.

19.
On 16 August 2012, Harrison had the order for R.H.'s arrest stricken, and the
matter was set for hearing on 26 September 2012.
20.
Harrison failed to inform R.H. that a hearing had been scheduled in her case on
26 September 2012.
As a result of Harrison's failure to inform R.H. of the 26 September 2012
21.
hearing, R.H. failed to appear at the hearing and the judge issued another order for R.H.'s
arrest.
22.
Throughout the representation, Harrison failed to respond to R.H.'s inquiries
concerning her case.
23.
Harrison's failure to inform R.H. of scheduled court dates unnecessarily
delayed resolution ofR.H.'s case.
24.
In February 2013, C.M. retained Harrison to represent her on charges of
driving while intoxicated in Mecklenburg County, file no. 13 CR 200782, and driving with a
revoked license in Cabarrus County,file no. 13 CR 700667.
25.

C.M. paid Harrison $650.00 for the representation.

26.
Throughout the representation, Harrison failed to respond to C.M.'s inquiries
concerning her case.
27.
C.M. was dissatisfied with Harrison's representation and filed a grievance with
the North Carolina State Bar against Harrison, grievance file no. 13G0371.
28.
Grievance file no. 13G0371 was referred to the Grievance Committee of the
26th Judicial District for investigation. A member of the 26th Judicial District Grievance
Committee was assigned to investigate the grievance.
29.
By letter dated 30 May 2013, Harrison was notified of C.M.'s grievance and
requested to file a written response to the grievance within fifteen days of his receipt of the
letter.
30.

Harrison faxed a written response to the investigator on 5 July 2013.

31.
After reviewing Harrison's response to the grievance, the investigator called
Harrison multiple times to obtain additional information.
32.

Harrison did not return the investigator's telephone calls.

33.
In March 2013, J.H. retained Harrison to represent her on a charge of driving
while intoxicated in Gaston County,file no. 13 CR 1723.
34.

J.H. paid Harrison $1,000.00 for the representation.

35.

Harrison made one court appearance on behalf ofJ.H.

36.
At this appearance, Harrison told J.H. that she could leave the courthouse and
that he would contact her.
37.

Harrison never subsequently contacted J.H.

38.
J.H. made multiple inquiries to Harrison's office requesting an update on the
status of her case.
39.

Harrison did not respond to J.H.'s inquiries.

40.
Harrison subsequently failed to inform J.H. of her next scheduled court date
and that she was required to appear at this hearing.
41.
As a result of Harrison's failure to inform J.H. about her next scheduled court
date, J.H. failed to appear at the hearing and thejudge issued an order for J.H.'s arrest.
42.

Harrison did not complete the matter for which J.H. had retained him.

43.

Harrison did not refund any portion ofthe fee J.H. paid.

44. _ On 7 July 2014, J.H. filed a grievance with the North Carolina State Bar,
-grievance-fileno. 14G0623.
45.
On 1 November 2014,the State Bar served Harrison with a Letter of Notice in
grievance file no. 14G0623.
46.
Harrison was required to respond to the Letter ofNotice within fifteen days of
his receipt ofthe Letter ofNotice.
47.

Harrison did not respond to the Letter ofNoti9e.

48.
In June 2013,R.B. consulted with Harrison regarding R.B.'s girlfriend's threat
to take legal action against R.B.
R.B. paid Harrison a $150.00 consultation fee and a $300.00 fee for
49.
representation in any action filed against R.B. by his girlfriend.
50.
Harrison recommended that they wait to take action until such time as R.B.'s
girlfriend filed papers with the court.
51.

R.B.'s girlfriend did not file any legal action against R.B.as anticipated.

52.

Harrison did not provide any legal services for which R.B. retained him.

53.

R.B. contacted Harrison multiple times and asked for a refund of the fee R.B.

54.

Harrison did not respond to R.B.'s inquiries.

paid.

55.

Harrison did not refund the fee R.B. paid.

56.
On or about 22 November 2014, R.B. filed with the North Carolina State Bar a
Petition for Resolution of Disputed Fee concerning Harrison's representation of him, fee
dispute file no. 13FD0548.
57.
R.B.'s fee dispute petition was referred to the Fee Dispute Resolution
Committee ofthe 26th Judicial District for resolution.
58.
By letter dated 4 December 2013, Harrison was notified ofthe fee dispute and
ofthe requirement that he respond to the dispute in writing within fifteen days.
59.

Harrison failed to respond to the fee dispute.

60.
The mediator assigned to this fee dispute telephoned Harrison twice to request
that Harrison submit a response.
61.

Harrison did not return the mediator's calls.

62.
After consulting with Harrison's office, the mediator set a mediation ofthe fee
dispute for 3 January 2014 and sent a letter to Harrison confirming the date.
63.

Harrison did not appear for the mediation.

64.
On 15 January 2014, as a result of Harrison's failure to participate in the fee
dispute resolution process, the State Bar opened a grievance against Harrison, grievance file
no. 14G0027.
65.
The State Bar served Harrison with a Letter of Notice in grievance file no.
1400027 on 10 March 2014.
66.
Harrison was required to respond to the Letter of Notice within fifteen days of
his receipt ofthe Letter ofNotice.
67.

Harrison did not respond to the Letter ofNotice.

68. In August 2013, Harrison was retained to defend I.J. and VV Mineral, LLC,in
a civil action filed in Mecklenburg County,file no. 13-CVS-11764.
69.
On or about 26 September 2013, opposing counsel served discovery requests
on Harrison and asked Harrison to contact him to schedule depositions ofHarrison's clients.
70.

Harrison never responded to the discovery requests.

71.
Between 26 September and 19 October 2013, opposing counsel left telephone
messages for Harrison and sent Harrison an e-mail requesting that Harrison call to discuss
scheduling depositions ofHarrison's clients.
72.

Harrison did not respond to any ofopposing counsel's messages.

On or about 14 October 2013, opposing counsel served Harrison with notice of
73.
deposition
for 4 November 2013.
his clients'
74.
On 30 and 31 October 2013, opposing counsel called Harrison's office to
confirm Harrison's clients' attendance at the deposition.
75.

Harrison did not respond to opposing counsel's calls.

76.

Neither Harrison nor his clients appeared for the noticed deposition.

On 4 November 2013, opposing counsel filed a motion for sanctions,
77.
requesting attorney's fees and requesting that the court enter default judgment against
Harrison's clients for their failure to participate in discovery. Opposing counsel noticed the
hearing on the motion for sanctions for 9 December 2013.
78.
sanctions.

Harrison did not appear at the 9 December 2013 hearing on the motion for

Opposing counsel's motion for sanctions was subsequently granted and the
79.
court entered ajudnieni against Harrison's clients for attorney's fees,
80.
Opposing- -counsel—later moved for—summary judgment against Haffisoes
clients, which was also granted.
81.
On 27 November 2013, opposing counsel reported Harrison's conduct to the
North Carolina State Bar,resulting in the opening of grievance file no. 13G1109.
82.
On 13 January 2014, the State Bar served Harrison with a Letter of Notice in
No. 13G1109.
83.
Harrison was required to respond to the Letter of Notice within fifteen days of
his receipt ofthe Letter ofNotice.
84.

Harrison did not respond to the Letter ofNotice.

85.
In 2012 or 2013, F.M. retained Harrison to have a marijuana charge expunged
from her record.
86.

F.M. paid Harrison $200.00 for the representation.

Harrison failed to file the expungement paperwork and failed to provide any
87.
other services to F.M.
88.
On 16 October 2014, F.M. filed with the North Carolina State Bar a Petition
for Resolution ofDisputed Fee,fee dispute file no. 14FD0512.
89.
On 16 October 2014,the State Bar mailed notice ofthe fee dispute to Harrison.
The letter containing the notice was sent by certified mail to the address for Harrison on file
with the State Bar's Membership Department.
A

90.
The letter containing notice of the fee dispute was returned as not deliverable
as addressed.
On 27 October 2014, as a result of Harrison's failure to participate in the fee
91.
dispute resolution process the State Bar opened a grievance against Harrison, grievance file
no. 14G1010.
92.
The State Bar served Defendant with a Letter of Notice in grievance file no.
14G1010 on 1 November 2014.
93.
Defendant was required to respond to the Letter of Notice within fifteen days
ofins receipt ofthe Letter ofNotice.
94.

Defendant failed to respond to the Letter ofNotice.

95.
In or around 2013, A.M. retained Harrison to represent him on a charge of
driving while intoxicated in Mecklenburg County,file no. 13 CR 214553.
96.

A.M. paid Harrison $1,000.00 for the representation.

97.
In July 2013, Harrison had the case continued to 30 September 2013 so he
would have time to collect necessary evidence in the matter..
98.
During the representation, A.M. was only temporarily in the United States and
was to return to India in November 2013. A.M. communicated this timeframe to Harrison.
99.
A.M. became concemed about resolving his case prior to his departure and
began contacting Harrison frequently.
100.

Harrison did not respond to all ofA.M.'s phone calls and emails.

101. On or about 30 September 2013, A.M. left a voicemail for Harrison indicating
that, due to the lack of communication, he would be hiring another attorney and filing a
complaint against Harrison with the State Bar.
102. Harrison returned A.M.'s telephone call promptly and explained that A.M.
could either plead guilty or fight the charge on the basis ofthe State's delay in releasing A.M.
from custody, which would require waiting until the next court date.
103. A.M. elected not to plead guilty, and Harrison told A.M. that he would have to
appear in court on 21 October 2013.
104. A.M.subsequently checked the online court calendar and saw that his case was
calendared for 9 December 2013.
105. When A.M. informed Harrison of the'calendar issue, Harrison told A.M. that
something was wrong with the court calendar and that he would fix it.
106.

Harrison failed to correct the calendaring issue as promised.
7

107. On 25 October 2013, Harrison ceased responding to any of A.M.'s telephone
calls or emails.
108.
Harrison.

A.M. retained another attorney to resolve the matter for which he retained

109. Harrison never refunded any portion of the fee A.M. paid despite A.M.'s
request for a refund upon terminating the representation.
110. On 19 December 2013, A.M. filed a grievance with the North Carolina State
Bar, grievance file no. 13G1184.
111. On 13 January 2014, the State Bar served Harrison with a Letter of Notice in
•
grievance file no. 13G1184.
112. Harrison was required to respond to the Letter of Notice within fifteen days of
his receipt ofthe Letter ofNotice.
113.

Harrison did not respond to the Letter ofNotice.

_ _ _ 114._ _In _or around January 2013, T.L. retained Harrison for representation on a
charge ofdriving while intoxicated in-Gaston County,file no. 12 CR-67-172. - 115.

T.L. paid Harrison $1,050.00 for the representation.

116. Throughout the representation, Harrison failed to respond to T.L.'s inquiries
concerning his case.
117. On or about 27 May 2014, Harrison consented to being transferred to inactive
status with the North Carolina State Bar by order ofthe Mecklenburg County Superior Court,
thereby prohibiting Harrison from practicing law.
118.

Harrison failed to inform T.L. that he could no longer represent hirn.

119.

Harrison did not complete the matter for which T.L. retained him.

120.

Harrison failed to refund any unearned portion ofthe fee T.L. paid.

121. On 8 October 2014, T.L. filed with the North Carolina State Bar a Petition for
Resolution ofDisputed Fee,fee dispute file no. 14FD0495.
122. On 8 October 2014, the State Bar mailed notice ofthe fee dispute to Harrison.
The letter containing the notice was sent by certified mail to the address for Harrison on file
with the State Bar's Membership Department.
123.
addressed.

The letter containing notice of the fee dispute was returned as insufficiently

124. On 21 October 2014, as a result of Harrison's failure to participate in the fee
dispute resolution process, the State Bar opened a grievance against Harrison, grievance file
no. 14G0999.
125. The State Bar served Harrison with a Letter of Notice in grievance file no.
14G0999 on 1 November 2014.
126. Harrison was required to respond to the Letter of Notice within fifteen days of
his receipt ofthe Letter ofNotice.
127.

Harrison failed to respond to the Letter ofNotice.

128. In or around March 2013, A.D. retained Harrison for representation on a
charge of underage drinking in Gaston County,file no. 13 CR 56941.
129.

A.D. paid Harrison $1,800.00 for the representation.

130.

A.D. had a court date scheduled for 2 June 2014.

131. A.D. informed Harrison well in advance ofthat date that she would likely need
to postpone the hearing because she was pregnant and due to give birth on 3 May 2014.
132.
continued.

Harrison assured A.D. that he would get her 2 June 2014 hearing date

133.

Harrison did not take,action to get A.D.'s hearing date continued.

134.

Harrison never informed A.D.that her hearing date had not been continued.

135. As a result of Harrison failing to take action to get A.D.'s hearing date
continued as he promised, A.D. did not appear at her 2 June 2014 hearing date and the judge
issued an order for A.D.'s arrest.
136. Throughout the representation, Harrison failed to respond to A.D.'s inquiries
concerning her case.
137. Harrison failed to inform A.D. that, on 27 May 2014, he had been transferred
to inactive status by order of the Mecklenburg County Superior Court and that he could no
longer represent her.
138.

Harrison did not complete the matter for which A.D. retained him.

139.

Harrison did not refund any portion ofthe fee A.D. paid.

140.
assistance.

A.D. resolved the matter for which she retained Harrison without Harrison's

141. On or about 25 July 2014, A.D. filed with the North Carolina State Bar a
Petition for Resolution ofDisputed Fee,fee dispute file no. 14FD0397.

142. On 28 July 2014, the State Bar mailed notice of the fee dispute to Harrison.
The letter containing the notice was sent by certified mail to the address for Harrison on file
with the State Bar's Membership Department.
143.
addressed-

The letter containing notice of the fee dispute was returned as undeliverable as

144. On 5 August 2014, as a result of Harrison's failure to participate in the fee
dispute resolution process, the State Bar opened a grievance against Harrison, grievance file
no. 14G0731.
145. The State Bar served Harrison with a Letter of Notice in No. 14G0731 on 1
November 2014.
146. Harrison was required to respond to the Letter of Notice within fifteen days of
his receipt ofthe Letter ofNotice.
147.

Harrison failed to respond to the Letter ofNotice.

Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and with the consent of the parties, the
panel enters the following
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1.
All parties are properly before the hearing panel and the panel has jurisdiction
over Defendant, Sir Ashley J. Harrison, and over the subject matter ofthis proceeding.
2.
Defendant's condudt, as set out in the Findings of Fact above, constitutes
grounds for discipline pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 84-28(b)(3) in that Defendant failed to
answer the formal inquiries issued by the North Carolina State Bar in eight disciplinary
matters.
3.
Defendant's conduct, as set out in the Findings of Fact above, constitutes
grounds for discipline pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 84-28(b)(2) as follows:
(a) By failing to inform R.H. that hearings had been scheduled in her case on 9
May and 26 September 2012 and by failing to inform R.H. that the hearing
scheduled for 20 June 2012 had been rescheduled to 25 June 2012, resulting
in R.H. failing to appear in court and orders being issued for her arrest, and
by failing to respond to R.H.'s inquiries concerning her case, Defendant
failed to keep his client reasonably informed about the status of a matter in
violation of Rule 1.4(a)(3), failed to respond to reasonable requests for
information from his client in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(4), and engaged in
conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice in violation of Rule
8.4(d);

1n

(b) By failing to respond to C.M.'s inquiries concerning her case, Defendant
failed to respond to reasonable requests for information from his client in
violation ofRule 1.4(a)(4);

(c) By failing to return the investigator's telephone calls during the 26th Judicial
District Grievance Committee's investigation of grievance file no. 13G0371,
Defendant knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information
from a disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b);
(d) By failing to inform J.H. of when she was required to appear in court and
failing to return J.H.'s telephone calls, Defendant failed to keep the client
reasonably informed about the status of the matter in violation of Rule
1.4(a)(3) and failed to promptly comply with reasonable requests for
in formation in violation ofRule 1.4(a)(4);
(e) By failing to complete J.H.'s matter for which he was retained and by
keeping the entire fee paid by III. despite failing to provide the legal
services for which he was retained, Defendant failed to act with reasonable
diligence and promptness in representing a client in violation of Rule L3,
collected a clearly excessive fee in violation of Rule 1.5(a), and failed to take
reasonably practicable steps upon termination of i*epresentation to protect a
client's interests in violation of Rule 1.16(d);

(f)

By failing to respond to the Letter of Notice in grievance file no. 14G0623,
Defendant knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information
from a disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b);

(g) By failing to refund R.B.'s fee after providing no legal services to him,
Defendant collected a clearly excessive fee in violation of Rule 1.5(a) and
failed to take reasonably practicable steps upon termination of representation
to protect a client's interests in violation ofRule 1.16(d);
(h) By failing to respond to the fee dispute petition R.B. initiated and to attend
the fee dispute mediation, Defendant failed to participate in good faith in the
fee dispute resolution process in violation ofRule 1.5(f)(2);

(i)

By failing to respond to the Letter of Notice in grievance file no. 14G0027,
Defendant knowingly failed to respond to a lawful dernand for information
from a disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b);

(j)

By foiling to respond to discovery requests in the matter for which I.J. and
VV Mineral LLC retained him, by failing to appear at his clients' deposition,
and by failing to appear at a hearing scheduled in his clients' case, Defendant
failed to act with reasonable diligence in representing a client in violation of
Rule 1.3, failed to make a reasonably diligent effort to comply with a legally
proper discovery request by an opposing party in violation ofRule 3.4(d)(2),
and engaged in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice in
violation ofRule 8.4(d);
11

(k) By failing to respond to the Letter of Notice in grievance file no. 13G1109,
Defendant knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information
from a disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b);
(1)

By failing to pursue an expungement on F.M.'s behalf after receiving
payment for the-representation and by keeping the entire fee paid by F.M.
despite failing to provide the legal services for which he was retained,
Defendant failed to act with reasonable diligence in violation of Rule 1.3,
collected a clearly excessive fee in violation of Rule 1.5(a), and failed to take
reasonably practicable steps upon termination of representation to protect a
client's interests in violation ofRule 1.16(d);

(m) By failing to respond to-the Letter of Notice in grievance file no. 14G1010,
Defendant knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information
from a disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b);

(n) By failing to complete the matter for which A.M. retained him;and by
keeping the entire. fee paid by A.M. despite failing to provide the legal
services for which he Was retained, Defendant failed to act with reasonable
diligence and promptness in representing a client in violation of Rule 1.3,
collected a clearly exCessive fee in violation ofRule 1.5(a), and failed to take
reasonably practicable steps upon termination of representation to protect a
client's interests in violation ofRule 1.16(d);
(o) By failing to respond to A.M.'s inquiries concerning his case, Defendant
failed to reasonably consult with his client about the means by which the
client's objectives were to be accomplished in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2),
failed to keep the client reasonably informed about the status ofthe matter in
violation of Rule 1.4(a)(3), and failed to promptly comply with reasonable
requests for information in violation ofRule 1.4(a)(4);
(p) By failing to respond to the Letter of Notice in grievance file no. 13G1184,
Defendant knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information
from a disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b);

(q) By failing to inform T.L. of his inability to practice law and by failing to

respond to T.L.'s inquiries, Defendant failed to reasonably consult with his
client about the means by which the client's objectives were to be
accomplished in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2), failed to keep the client
reasonably informed about the status of the matter in violation of Rule
1.4(a)(3), and failed to promptly comply with reasonable requests for
information in violation.ofRule 1.4(a)(4);

(r) By keeping the entire fee paid by T.L. despite failing to complete the matter
for which he was retnined and by failing to notify T.L. of his inability to
continue the representation, Defendant collected a clearly excessive fee in
violation of Rule 1.5(a) and failed to take reasonably practicable steps to

1')

protect a client's interests upon termination of representation in violation of
Rule 1.16(d);
(s) By failing to respond to the Letter of Notice in 14G0999, Defendant
knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information from a
disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b);
(t)

By failing to address the calendaring of A.D.'s case as requested by his
client, by keeping the entire fee paid by A.D. despite failing to complete the
matter for which he ,was retained, and by failing to, inform A.D. of his
inability to continue the representation, Defendant failed to act with
reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client in violation of
Rule 1.3, collected a clearly excessive fee in violation of Rule 1.5(a), and
failed to take reasonably practicable steps upon termination ofrepresentation
to protect a client's intermits in violation ofRule 1.16(d);

(u) By failing to inform A.D. that her hearing date had not been continued, by
failing to inform A.D. of his inability to practice law, and by otherwise
failing to respond to A.D.'s requests for information, Defendant failed to
reasonably consult with his client about the means by which the client's
objectives were to be accomplished in violation of Rule 1.4(a)(2), failed to
keep the client reasonably informed about the status ofthe matter in violation
of Rule 1.4(a)(3), and failed to promptly,comply with reasonable requests for
information in violation ofRule 1.4(a)(4); and
(v) By failing to respond to the Letter of Notice in grievance file no. 14G0731,
Defendant knowingly failed to respond to a lawful demand for information
from a disciplinary authority in violation ofRule 8.1(b).
Based upon the consent of the parties, the hearing panel also finds by clear, cogent,
and convincing evidence the following
ADDITIONAL FINDINGS REGARDING DISCIPLINE
1.
During the relevant periods herein, Defendant suffered from depression and
anxiety, which significantly contributed to Defendant's neglect and failure to timely or
appropriately respond to his clients. In light of these conditions, in May 2014, Defendant
consented to winding down his practice and being transferred to inactiw status with the State
Bar by Order of the Mecklenburg County Superior Court. In 2015, Defendant was evaluated
by a licensed psychologist who opined that Defendant is not currently disabled from the
practice of law as defined by the State Bar's administrative rules (located at 27 N.C. Admin.
Code 1B § .0103(19)). Defendant was subsequently transferred back to active status with the
State Bar in September 2015 by the Mecklenburg County Superior Court. Although
Defendant is not presently suffering from any disability that would prevent him from
practicing law, Defendant has not resumed his practice due to his rnental condition that could
potentially harm his clients and that could interfere with his ability to practice law in
accordance with the Rules ofProfessional Conduct should he resume his practice.

2.
Defendant's conduct, to wit: severe and widespread neglect of client matters,
failure to communicate with clients, and failure to complete the matters for which he was
retained caused significant harm to his clients and their abilities to resolve their legal matters.
Defendant's conduct caused significant confusion and frustration among his clients, and in
some instances resulted in the court issuing orders for his clients' arrest. Defendant's conduct
also impaired his elients' abilities to achieve the goals of their respective representations by
causing unnecessary delay in their cases.
Defendant's clients were vulnerable victims of his misconduct. His clients
3.
were unfamiliar with the Iegal process and had lirnited financial resources. His clients had
paid and relied upon Defendant to protect or pursue their legal rights.
Defendant's conduct caused significant harm to the public and to the
4.
administration ofjustice by unnecessarily delaying resolution of his clients' cases. Justice is
achieved when all matters are timely pursued and resolved; justice is impeded by attorneys
who knowingly abandon their clients and their duties as an attomey, leaving their clients'
cases and their clients' interests in an unnecessarily uncertain status such as that created by
Defendant.
5.
Defendant caused significant harm to the profession by repeatedly failing to
repond to multiple State-Bar incinires and otherwise failing to participate in the grievance
process. Such conduct interferes with the State Bar's ability to regulate its members and
undermines the profession's privilege to remain self-regulating.
6.
By engaging in repeated instances of client neglect and failure to respond to
the Bar, Defendant committed multiple offenses and displayed a pattem of misconduct. At
the timeof hisconduct,Defendant knew or should have known that his actions could harm his
clients and the administration ofjustice.
Defendant's conduct caused potential significant harm to the standing of the
7.
legal profession in the eyes ofthe public in that such conduct by attomeys erodes the trust of
the public in the profession. Confidence in the legal profession is a building block for public
trust in the entire legal system.
There is an absence of any evidence that Defendant intended to harm his
8.
clients or that he exhibited a dishonest or selfish motive.
9.

Defendant has no prior discipline.

Defendant has acknowledged his conduct violated the Rules of Professional
10.
Conduct and is remorseful for his actions.
Based upon the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Additional. Findings
Regarding Discipline,the hearing panel also enters the following

CONCLUSIONS REGARDING DISCIPLINE
1.
The hearing panel has carefully considered all of the different forms of
discipline available to it, In addition, the hearing panel has considered all of the factors
enumerated in 27 N.C. Admin, Code 1B § .0114(w)(3) of the Rules and Regulations of the
North Carolina State Bar and detertnines the following factors are applicable:
a. Defendant's lack ofprior disciplinary offenses;
b. Defendant's lack ofa selfish or dishonest motive;
c. Defendant's pattem of misconduct;
d. Defendant's multiple offenses;
e. The effect of Defendant's personal or emotional problems on the conduct in
question;
f. Defendant's remorse; and
g. The vulnerability ofthe victims, Defendant's clients.
2.
The hearing panel concludes that none of the factors enumerated in 27 N.C.
Admin. Code 1B § .0114(w)(2) ofthe Rules and Regulations ofthe North Carolina State Bar
are present in this case.
3.
The hearing panel has carefully considered all of the factors enumerated in 27
N.C. Admin. Code 1B § .0114(w)(1)ofthe Rules and Regulations ofthe North Carolina State
Bar and determines the following factors warrant suspension of Defendant's license:
a. Defendant's intent to commit acts where the hann or potential harm was
foreseeable;
b. Defendant's actions potentially had a negative impact on his clients' and the
public's perception ofthe legal profession;
c. Defendant's actions had a negative impact on the administration ofjustice;
d. Defendant's conduct impaired his clients' abilities to achieve the goals of the
representation; and
e. Defendant's multiple instances offailure to participate in the legal profession's
self-regulation process.
4.
The hearing panel has considered all other forms of discipline and concludes
that any sanction less than suspension would fail to acknowledge the seriousness of the
offenses committed by Defendant, would not adequately protect the public, and would send
the wrong rnessage to attomeys and to the public regarding the conduct expected of members
ofthe Bar.
1c

The hearing panel futther concludes that due to the extensive client neglect
5.
described in the present action, the public will only be adequately protected by imposing a
period of active suspension of Defendant's law license. Additionally, the hearing panel
concludes that Defendant should be allowed the opportunity to petition for a stay of a portion
ofthe suspension imposed by this Order upon compliance with certain conditions designed to
ensure protection of the public and Defendant's-compliance with the-Rules of Professional
Conduct.
6.
Under other circumstances, the misconduct in this case would warrant more
serious discipline as set forth in the additional findings above. However, the unique
circumstances surrounding this case justify lesser discipline than would otherwise be
appropriate. The factors that particularly warrant lesser discipline include: Defendant's
depression and anxiety significantly contributed to Defendant's misconduct; Defendant has
accepted personal responsibility for his actions; Defendant acknowledges the wrongfulness
and seriousness of his misconduct; and Defendant is genuinely remorseful.
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, Conclusions ofLaw,and Findings
Regarding Discipline,the hearing panel enters the following
ORDER OF DISCIPLINE
The license of Defendant, Sir Ashley J. Harrison, is hereby suspended for five
1.
years. This Order shall be effective upon filing.
Defendant shall submit his license and membership card to the Secretary ofthe
2.
North Carolina State Bar no later than 30 days following the effective date ofthis Order. To
the extent not already completed, Defendant shall have 30 days to comply with the wind
down provisions contained in Rule .0124 of the North Carolina State Bar Discipline and
Disability Rules, located at 27 N.C. Admin. Code 1B § .0124.
Within 30 days ofthe effective date ofthis Order, Defendant shall provide the
3.
State Bar with an address and telephone number at which clients can communicate with
Defendant.
4.
Defendant shall pay the costs and administrative fees of this proceeding as
assessed by the Secretary within 120 days ofservice ofthe statement ofcosts upon him.
After serving no fess than three years of the suspension, Defendant may
5.
petition for a stay of the remaining period of suspension imposed by -this Order by filing a
petition with the Secretary of the North Carolina State Bar. In order to be eligible for a stay
of the remaining period of suspension, Defendant must demonstrate by clear, cogent, and
convincing evidence that, in addition to complying with the general provisions for
reinstatement listed in 27 N.C. Admin. Code 1B § .0125 of the North Carolina State Bar
Discipline & Disability Rules,he has complied with the following conditions:
(a)

Not more than 90 days before he petitions for a stay, Defendant must be
evaluated by a licensed and qualified psychiatrist or psychologist. Such

16

psychiatrist/psychologist shall be approved in advance by the North Carolina
State Bar Office of Counsel. Such psychiatrist/psychologist shall certify
under oath whether, based on his or her independent and comprehensive
evaluation of Defendant and in his or her professional opinion, Defendant
currently has any physical, mental, psychological, behavioral, cognitive, or
emotional illness, disorder, or other condition that impairs Defendant's
ability to practice law, that impacts Defendant's ability or willingness to
comply with the Rules of Professional Conduct, and/or that poses a risk of
harm to the public if he engages in the practice oflaw. Defendant shall sign
an authorization form consenting to the release of all medical records and
information related to Defendant's evaluation to the Office of Counsel, and
Defendant shall not revoke that release. Defendant shall simultaneously
provide a copy of such signed authorization to the Office of Counsel and the
Defendant shall direct the evaluating
psychiatrist/psychologist.
psyChiatristipsychologist described herein to provide a written report ofsuch
evaluation and recommended treatment, if any, to the Office of Counsel
within 30 days of the evaluation taking place. All expenses of such
evaluation and report shall be borne by Defendant;
(b)

Defendant must have arranged for an active member of the North Carolina
State Bar to serve as his law practice monitor. Defendant's practice monitor
shall be an attorney in good standing who practices law in the judicial district
in which Defendant proposes to practice law and who has been approved by
the Office of Counsel. The monitor shall agree to supervise all client matters
and must ensure that Defendant handles all client matters in a timely fashion,
including promptly responding to his clients and diligently pursuing his
clients' matters. Defendant shall agree to meet once a month with his
rnonitoring attorney, report the status of all current• client matters to the
monitoring attorney, cooperate with the monitoring attomey, and provide any
information the monitoring attorney deems reasonably necessary to ensure
that Defendant is properly and timely handling all client matters. The
monitoring attorney shall submit written quarterly reports ofthis supervision
to the Office of Counsel, such reports due on the following dates as they
occur during any stay of this suspension: January 15, April 15, July 15, and
October 15. Defendant bears the responsibility of ensuring the monitoring
attorney sends a written report each quarter to the Office of Counsel as
described above. This monitoring will occur for the duration of any stay of
this suspension. Defendant shall pay the cost, if any, charged by the
monitoring attorney for this supervision. Defendant must make the
arrangements for this monitoring attorney and supply the Office of Counsel
with a letter from the monitoring attorney confirming his or her agreement to
perform all ofthe duties listed above;

(c)

Defendant must have personally responded to client inquiries within the
following periods oftime:

17

i. Upon receiving a request from a client for return of his or her client
file(s), Defendant shall return the requested client file(s) within 10 days
of receiving such a request.
ii. Upon receiving a request from a client for a refund of an unearned fee,
-Defendant shall refund the entirety of-any unearned fee paid by the
client to Defendant within 60 days of receiving such a request. If
Defendant disputes the requested refund — in its entirety or in part —
Defendant shall inform the client in writing of his contention and the
reasons therefor in his response to the client's inquiry. In his petition
for a stay of suspension, Defendant shall account to the State Bar for all
refunds requested and all refunds issued during his suspension, noting
all refund disputes and the reasons therefor.
iii. Defendant shall respond to all other client inquiries within 7 days of
receiving such a request.
(d)

Defendant must have kept the North. Carolina State Bar membership
department advised of his current physical home and business addresses and
telephone numbers;

(e)

certified mail from the North Carolina
Defendant must have accepted
State Bar (including the Client Security Fund)and responded to all letters of
notice and requests for information from the North Carolina State Bar by the
deadlines stated in the communication or within fifteen days of receipt of
such communication, whichever is earlier;

(f)

Defendant must have fulfilled all of his State Bar membership and
continuing legal education requirements, and Defendant must have paid all
fees and costs assessed by the State Bar and the Client Security Fund by the
applicable deadline;

(g)

Defendant must have participated fully and timely in the State Bar's fee
dispute program when notified of any'petitions for resolution of disputed
fees;

(h)

Defendant must not have not violated any state or federal laws or any
provisions ofthe Rules ofProfessional Conduct; and

(i)

Defendant must have timely paid the costs and administrative fees associated
with this case as described in paragraph 3 above.

6.
If Defendant is granted a stay of the suspension of his law license pursuant to
this Order, the stay will continue in force only as long as Defendant complies with the
following conditions:
(a)

Within 30 days of entry of an order staying any portion of this suspension,
Defendant shall execute a new contract with the North Carolina State Bar's

Lawyer Assistance Program. Such contract shall last throughout the entirety
of any stayed period of Defendant's suspension. Defendant shall sign an
authorization form consenting to the release to the Office of Counsel of any
records and information related to Defendant's participation in and
compliance with the Lawyer Assistance Program, and Defendant shall not
revoke that release. Defendant shall simultaneously provide a copy of such
signed authorization to the Office of Counsel and the Lawyer Assistance
Program;
(b)

(c)

Defendant shall comply with all treatment recorninendations of the
evaluating psychiatrist/psychologist described in paragraph 5(a) above as
well as any treatment provider(s), including recomn►endations from the
Lawyer Assistance Program. Defendant shall direct his treatment provider(s)
to provide the Office of Counsel with semi-annual written reports concerning
Defendant's condition, Defendant's compliance with the treatment plan, and
Defendant's progress resulting from treatment for the duration of any stay of
his suspension. Such reports shall be received by the Office of Counsel
every June 1 and December 1. Defendant shall also comply with any and all
requests from the Office of Counsel seeking updates on the status of his
ongoing treatment within fifteen (15) days of receipt of such requests. If
Defendant switches treatment providers during any stayed period of his
suspension, Defendant shall sign an authorization form consenting to the
release of any medical records and information related to Defendant's
treatment to the Office of Counsel, and Defendant shall not revoke that
release. Defendant shall simultaneously provide a copy of such signed
authorization to the Office of Counsel and his new treatment provider(s).
Within 30 days of starting treatment with the new provider(s), Defendant
shall direct such new treatment provider(s) to provide the Office of Counsel
with a written report detailing Defendant's treatment plan, as well as the
semi-annual written reports described above. All expenses ofsuch treatment
and reports shall be borne by Defendant;
Defendant shall meet with his law practice monitor as, described in paragraph
5(b) above. Defendant shall meet at least once a month with his monitoring
attorney, report the status of all current client matters to the monitoring
attorney, cooperate with the monitoring attorney, and provide any
information the monitoring attorney deems reasonably necessary to ensure
that Defendant is properly and timely handling all client matters. Defendant
shall direct his law practice monitor to submit written quarterly reports of
this supervision to the Office of Counsel, such reports due on the following
dates as they occur during the stay ofthis suspension: January 15, April 15,
July 15, and October 15. Defendant bears the responsibility of ensuring the
monitoring attorney sends a written report each quarter to the Office of
Counsel as described above. This monitoring shall occur for the duration of
any stay of this suspension. Defendant shall pay the cost, if any, charged by
the monitor for this supervision;

10

(d)

Defendant shall cooperate with the Office of Counsel and make appropriate
arrangements for an alternate monitoring attorney if needed during any stay
ofthis suspension;

(e)

Defendant shall keep the North Carolina State Bar membership department
advised of his current physical home and business addresses and telephone
numbers;

(t)

Defendant shall accept all certified mail from the North Carolina State Bar
and respond to all letters of notice and requests for information from the
North Carolina State Bar by the deadlines stated in the communication or
within fifteen days ofreceipt ofsuch communication, whichever is earlier;

(g)

Defendant shall timely comply with his State Bar membership and
continuing legal education requirements, and Defendant shall pay all fees
and costs assessed by the State Bar and the Client Security Fund by the
applicable deadline;

(h)

Defendant shall participate fully and timely in the fee dispute program when
notified ofany petitions for resolution of disputed fees; and
1Yefendaiit shall not violate any st4e or federal laws orany provisions ofthe
Rules ofProfessional Conduct.

7.
If Defendant fails to comply with any one or more of the conditions stated in
Paragraph 5 above, then the stay of fhe suspension of his law license may be lifted as
provided in 27 N.C. Admin. Code 1B § .0114(x) of the North Carolina State Bar Discipline
and Disability Rules.
8.
IfDefendant does not seek a stay of any active period ofsuspension, or ifsome
part of the suspension is stayed and thereafter the stay is revoked, Defendant must provide in
his application for reinstatement clear, cogent, and convincing evidence ofthe following:
(a)

Compliance with the general provisions for reinstatement listed in 27 N.C.
Admin. Code 1B § .0125 of the North Carolina State Bar Discipline &
Disability Rules; and

(b)

Compliance with the conditions set out in Paragraphs 5(a) and 5(c) — (i)
above.

9.
Nothing in this Order shall prohibit the State Bar from investigating and, if
necessary, pursuing disciplinary action against Defendant for additional misconduct
discovered or reported which occurred during the same time period as the conduct addressed
in this Order.
10.
The Disciplinary Hearing Commission will retain jurisdiction of this matter
pursuant to 27 N.C. Admin. Code 1B § .0114(x) of the North Carolina State Bar Discipline
and Disability Rules throughout any period of stayed suspension.

'7n

by,Ahe Chair iyith the consent ofthe other hearing panel members,this the
,2015.
day of

Jr., Chair
Josh I.
Disciplinary Hearing Panel

CONSEN

TO BY:

Brian P.D. Oten
Deputy Counsel
North Carolina State Bar
Counsel for Plaintiff

Maria
Deputy Counsel
North Carolina State Bar
Counsel for Plaintiff

Defendant

pages are
the official

Go to Top

Assistance Request

Request Accessibility Assistance

Name

Email

Phone

What do you need help with?

The HTML version is missing content

The HTML version contains errors

The reading order is incorrect or confusing

I need help understanding the content

I need a different alternative format

Other

Preferred format

Additional details

Urgency Urgent Soon Not urgent

Go to Top