CourtListener 4569247•In the Matter of Thomas F. Cotroneo
Full text
Supreme Court
In the Matter of Thomas F. Cotroneo. No. 2018-225-M.P.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to a motion filed by this Court’s Disciplinary
Counsel on October 5, 2018, to adjudge the respondent, Thomas F. Cotroneo, in contempt of
court, and to suspend him from the practice of law on an interim basis. The respondent was
notified that the motion would be presented to this Court at its conference on November 15,
2018. The respondent did not file an objection to the motion and failed to appear for the
conference. Having reviewed the motion and the representations of Disciplinary Counsel, we
deem that the motion should be granted.
The facts giving rise to this matter are as follows. On June 8, 2018, Disciplinary Counsel
received a complaint alleging that respondent had settled personal injury claims on behalf of
clients, withheld funds from his clients’ settlements to pay medical bills, and failed to remit those
payments on the clients’ behalf. A copy of that complaint was forwarded to respondent on June
13, 2018, directing him to file a written response to the complaint on or before July 3, 2018. The
respondent failed to comply. On July 12, 2018, a second notice was sent by Disciplinary
Counsel to respondent, via certified mail, directing him to file a response on or before July 23,
2018. That certified mail was received by respondent on July 19, 2018. The respondent did not
file a response after receipt of that correspondence.
On August 9, 2018, Disciplinary Counsel filed a petition with this Court pursuant to
Article III, Rule 6(e) of the Supreme Court Rules of Disciplinary Procedure for Attorneys,
requesting that we enter an order compelling respondent to file his answer or be suspended from
the practice of law. On August 27, 2018, prior to the petition being heard, respondent filed a
belated response to the disciplinary complaint that failed to address the issues raised in the
complaint or to account for the funds respondent had received on behalf of his clients.
On September 13, 2018, at the request of Disciplinary Counsel, the Clerk of the Supreme
Court issued a subpoena to respondent directing him to appear at the Office of Disciplinary
Counsel on October 4, 2018, to answer questions regarding the complaint and to provide his
financial records relating to the clients at issue. The respondent was served with that subpoena
on September 21, 2018. He failed to appear at the Office of Disciplinary Counsel or to provide
the subpoenaed records.
We do not hesitate to find that the respondent is in contempt. He has flagrantly
disregarded his obligation to respond to a lawful request for information from Disciplinary
Counsel, in violation of Article V, Rule 8.1 of the Supreme Court Rules of Professional Conduct,
and has refused to comply with a duly-authorized subpoena issued by the Clerk of this Court.
Accordingly, it is hereby ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the respondent, Thomas F.
Cotroneo, is hereby suspended from engaging in the practice of law in this state, effective
immediately, until further order of this Court.
Entered as an Order of this Court this 16th Day of November, 2018.
By Order,
______________/s/_________________
Clerk
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
SUPREME COURT – CLERK’S OFFICE
ORDER COVER SHEET
Title of Case In the Matter of Thomas F. Cotroneo.
No. 2018-225-M.P.
Case Number
November 16, 2018
Date Order Filed
Suttell, C.J., Goldberg, Flaherty, Robinson, and
Justices
Indeglia, JJ.
N/A
Source of Appeal
N/A
Judicial Officer From Lower Court
For Petitioner:
David D. Curtin, Esq.
Attorney(s) on Appeal
Chief Disciplinary Counsel
For Respondent:
Thomas F. Cotroneo, Pro Se
SU-CMS-02B (revised November 2016)
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.