In re Robbins
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
192 A.3d 558 (2018)
- Written by Jenny Perry, JD
Facts
Attorney Seth Robbins (defendant) represented Persaud Companies, Inc. (Persaud), a construction firm and government contractor. Robbins asked his friend Gary Day to serve as an indemnitor for Persaud’s surety bonds on certain projects. Robbins had previously represented Day in other matters without a written fee agreement. Robbins helped negotiate an agreement between Day and Hudson Insurance Company (Hudson), the primary surety on the projects. Persaud later fell behind on one of the contracts on which Day was an indemnitor and became the subject of a criminal investigation, but Robbins did not notify Day of these developments. As the situation deteriorated, Robbins assured Day everything was under control and failed to convey material information to him. Eventually, Hudson sued Persaud and Day, and disciplinary counsel filed charges against Robbins, asserting that (1) Robbins’s representation of Day had likely been adversely affected by his representation of Persaud and (2) Robbins had failed to keep Day reasonably informed about the status of the matter. Robbins argued he did not represent Day. Day testified that although he did not explicitly ask Robbins to represent him, Robbins negotiated part of the indemnity agreement for him, and Day did not sign the agreement until he confirmed with Robbins that he should do so. Day further testified that he received a demand letter from Hudson’s representatives and took no action based on Robbins’s assurances that he need not worry about it. On the other hand, Day did not pay Robbins for his services in the matter, and he was aware Robbins represented Persaud. The Board on Professional Responsibility (board) recommended that Robbins be suspended from the practice of law for 60 days and complete four hours of ethics-related continuing legal education before being reinstated. Robbins challenged the board’s finding that Day was his client.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.