BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY (2004)
Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference. The original PDF remains the official record for legal purposes.
Need help? Please use the Assistance Request Form below.
Original PDF Document
Download Official Record (arkovitz-1412-rel.pdf)
Alternative Accessible HTML
Accessible Alternative: This HTML version is an automatically processed accessible alternative. While it provides a searchable format, the text extraction may contain formatting or character errors. The original PDF remains the authoritative official record.
Need a different format? Use the Request Assistance Form.
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
of the
SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE
LANCE B. BRACY WILLIAM W. HUNT, III
CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL 1101 KERMIT DRIVE, SUITE 730 CHARLES A. HIGH
NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE 37217 SANDY GARRETT
LAURA L. CHASTAIN TELEPHONE: (615) 361-7500 JESSE D. JOSEPH
DEPUTY CHIEF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL
(800) 486-5714 JAMES A. VICK
FAX: (615) 367-2480 THERESA M. COSTONIS
BEVERLY P. SHARPE DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL
CONSUMER COUNSEL DIRECTOR E-MAIL: ethics@tbpr.org
RELEASE OF INFORMATION
RE: DONALD ARKOVITZ, BPR NO. 2954
CONTACT: SANDY GARRETT
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
615-361-7500
November 17, 2004
NASHVILLE ATTORNEY CENSURED
On June 18, 2004, the Board of Professional Responsibility approved Donald Arkovitzâs
Conditional Guilty Plea accepting a public censure. On November 15, 2004, the Supreme Court
entered an Order of Enforcement approving the public censure.
The Board of Professional Responsibility filed a Petition for Discipline against Arkovitz
pursuant to Rule 9, Rules of the Supreme Court of Tennessee. The Boardâs Petition for
Discipline charged Arkovitz with filing a Petition for Appointment of a Conservator which was
found by a Chancellor to contain inaccurate statements. The Chancellor further found in his
Memorandum dated August 26, 2003 that Arkovitz had failed to give proper notice and failed to
include information in the Petition as required by statutory law.
Arkovitz, through counsel, filed an Answer to the Petition but later submitted a
Conditional Guilty Plea in exchange for a public censure. Arkovitzâs actions and inactions
violate Rules 1.1; 1.3; 3.3; 3.4(b) and 8.4(a)(c)(d) of the Tennessee Rules of Professional
Conduct. This censure declares Arkovitzâs actions to be improper ethical conduct but does not
limit his right to practice law.
SG:mw
Arkovitz 1412 rel.doc