westmoreland-37255c.pdf (2015)
Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference.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 (westmoreland-37255c.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.
IN DISCIPLINARY DISTRICT IV
OF THE
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE
SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE
IN RE: CHRISTOPHER PAUL WESTMORELAND FILE NO.37255câ4nES
BPR No. 24789
Respondent, an attorney licensed
to practice law in Tennessee
(Bedford County)
PUBLIC CENSURE
The above complaint was filed against Christopher Paul Westmoreland, an attorney
licensed to practice law in Tennessee, alleging certain acts ofmisconduct. Pursuant to Tenn. Sup.
Ct. R. 9, the Board of Professional Responsibility considered these matters at its meeting on
September ll, 2015.
Mr. Westmoreland was appointed to represent a client on two criminal matters which
resulted in convictions. In the ï¬rst matter, Mr. Westmoreland timely ï¬led an appeal but neglected
to timely ï¬le the appellate brief. Mr. Westmoreland ï¬led a motion to accept the late-ï¬led brief
which was granted, but the Court cautioned Mr. Westmoreland about complying with the Rules of
Appellate Procedure and Orders of the Court. In the clientâs second matter, Mr. Westmorcland
neglected to timely ï¬le the notice of appeal. Several months later, Mr. Westmoreland ï¬led a
motion to accept the late-tiled notice of appeal which was granted. No activity took place on the
appeal for at least four months until the clerk notiï¬ed Mr. Westmoreland that the record had not
been received. Thereafter, the record was ï¬led, briefs were ï¬led, and the appeal was submitted on
briefs. Mr. Westmoreland also failed to timely respond to requests for information from his client.
By the aforementioned acts, Mr. Westmoreland violated Rules of Professional Conduct 1.3
(diligence), 1.4 (communication), 3.2 (expediting litigation), 3.4(c) (fairness to Opposing counsel),
and 8.4(d) (prejudice to the administration ofjustice). The client suffered delays in two cnâminal
appeals as a result of MI. Westmorelandâs actions. Mr. Westmoreland is hereby Publicly Censured
for these violations.
FOR THE BOARD OF
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
ichael King, Chair
Wbéf /5 a M3
92m: â