Fishers attorney gets stayed suspension, JLAP monitoring, over misconduct in 2 cases

A Fishers attorney has agreed to a stayed suspension in an attorney misconduct case, acknowledging he charged unreasonable fees and failed to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in two cases in which former clients filed grievances against him.

The Indiana Supreme Court on Friday suspended attorney Patrick E. Chavis IV for 90 days, stayed subject to completion of at least one year of monitoring with the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program. The court accepted the statement of circumstances and conditional agreement for discipline entered into by Chavis and the Indiana Supreme Court Disciplinary Commission.

The statement says Chavis agreed to represent Client 1 in a case seeking to establish he owed no child support arrearage. Chavis charged a $750 “non-refundable” initial fee with an hourly rate thereafter. The statement says Chavis “took no meaningful action on Client 1’s case, and Client 1 was unable to contact” Chavis.

The court order further says Chavis failed to claim certified mail sent to him by the commission or timely respond to its demand for information, leading to the initiation of show cause proceedings. When Chavis eventually responded, he could not provide any account of fees earned and made a full refund to Client 1 during the course of the disciplinary investigation.

Chavis was hired by Client 2 in October 2017 to prepare estate planning documents for the client’s elderly mother, who asked for the paperwork to be done by Thanksgiving of that year. A written agreement called for a “non-refundable” flat fee of $2,500 with an additional hourly rate for any services not specifically covered.

According to the order, no work was ever done for Client 2, who lodged a complaint with the commission after demanding a refund and receiving no reply. The court order says Chavis “claimed without support that he had been unable to reach Client 2 and was unaware Client 2 had been trying to reach him.” The order says Chavis likewise made a full refund to Client 2 during the course of the disciplinary investigation.

“The parties agree Respondent’s involvement in a contentious divorce was a factor contributing to his misconduct in this case, and Respondent has agreed to seek the assistance of the Judges and Lawyers Assistance Program (JLAP) to address his personal difficulties,” the court said in imposing the stayed suspension with probation.

The parties agree Chavis violated these Indiana Professional Conduct Rules:

• 1.3: Failure to act with reasonable diligence and promptness;
• 1.4(a)(3): Failure to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter;
• 1.4(a)(4): Failure to comply promptly with a client’s reasonable requests for information;
• 1.5(a): Making an agreement for, charging or collecting an unreasonable fee; and
• 1.16(d): Failure to refund an unearned fee upon termination of representation.

The parties also agree Chavis violated Indiana Admission & Discipline Rule 23(23.1) by failing to claim notices sent by certified mail. The costs of this proceeding are assessed against Chavis.

The case is In the Matter of: Patrick E. Chavis, IV, 18S-DI-491.