moyer-52898-6-public-censure.pdf (2018)
Archived Content: This document is formally archived for historical reference.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 (moyer-52898-6-public-censure.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.
1N DISCIPLINARY DISTRICT VI
OF THE
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
OF THE
SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE
IN RE: Robert Harnm Meyer, Respondent, File No. 52898»6~KB
BPR No. 13664, an attorney licensed
to practice law in Tennessee
(Montgomery County)
PUBLIC CENSURE
The above complaint was ï¬led against Robert Hamm Moyen an attorney licensed to
practice law in Tennessee, alleging certain acts of misconduct. Pursuant to Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 9V
' the Board of Professional Responsibility considered this matter at its meeting on December 8,
2017.
Mr. Meyer engaged in 21 pattern of coilecting a pattial attorney fee from clients in Chapter
"7 bankruptcy proceedings and requinâng the clients to make installment payments on the remainder
of his feet; after their bankruptcy petitions had been ï¬led. Mr. Meyer failed to advise his clients
that they were under no legal obligation to pay the remainder of his fees after their petitions were
ï¬led. Mr. Mover collected postâpetition attorney fees from his clients which constituted a
concurrent conï¬ict of interest since Mr. Meyer put himself in the position of creditor with his own
clients. in certain cases where his clients failed to comply with their installment payments, Mr.
'Moyer filed civil collections actions against them after their debts were discharged in bankruptcy
in violation of federal law. Additionally, in his collections actions, Mr. Meyer requested a one
third fee above and beyond the amount alleged to be otved as an attorney fee while acting in a pro
se capacityâ
By these acts, Robert Hamm Meyer has violated Rules of Professional Conduct 1.1
(competence), 1.4 (communication), 1.5 (fees), 1.7 (corifliet of interest), 1.9 (duties to former
clients), 3.1 (meritorious claims), and 8.4 (a) and (d) (misconduct), and is hereby Publicly
Consumed for these violations.
FOR, THE BOARD OF
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
i {imie C Miller, Chair
WW :0 30/3
19in