Here's an analysis of the case Robins v. Commission for Lawyer Discipline from Houston's First Court of Appeals. You can read the full text of the opinion by clicking here.
This is a Texas attorney disciplinary case involving Richard Andert Robins, an attorney who was disbarred following a jury finding that he engaged in professional misconduct related to his representation of Cindy Crisp and her heirs in a breach-of-contract lawsuit.
Key facts and issues:
- Crisp sold property to a buyer who bounced checks. She hired Robins to recover payment.
- Crisp died in 2015, but Robins filed suit in 2016 as if she were alive and delayed notifying the court and opposing counsel of her death for about three months.
- Robins tried to substitute Crisp’s son Austen as representative without a proper probate proceeding and misrepresented facts about Crisp’s debts.
- Robins refused to turn over the client file to Crisp’s heirs after they terminated his representation.
- The Commission for Lawyer Discipline charged Robins with multiple violations of Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct, including failure to surrender client property, filing frivolous claims, causing unreasonable delay and costs, failure to disclose a fact to avoid assisting fraud, and engaging in dishonest conduct.
- Robins raised defenses including a religious freedom claim based on his belief in cryopreservation, which the court struck.
- The jury found Robins violated all alleged rules, and the court ordered disbarment and other sanctions.
- Robins appealed on procedural grounds and challenged evidence sufficiency, but the appellate court affirmed.
The court’s reasoning highlighted:
- The duty to surrender client files upon termination is clear, and Robins’s retention of the file prejudiced his former clients.
- Continuing litigation after knowing Crisp was deceased without proper authority was frivolous and caused unnecessary delay and costs.
- Failure to disclose Crisp’s death to the court was dishonest and assisted a fraudulent act.
- Robins’s conduct was aggravated by disrespectful communications and refusal to acknowledge wrongdoing.
- The religious freedom defense was unsupported and irrelevant to the disciplinary proceeding.
- The jury’s findings were supported by legally and factually sufficient evidence.
- Allegations of juror misconduct were unsupported by the record.
- Robins’s constitutional challenges and other defenses were waived or irrelevant.
Overall, the case underscores the serious consequences lawyers face for ethical violations, especially when they involve dishonesty, failure to protect client interests, and disrespect for the judicial process. Robins’s actions prolonged litigation unnecessarily, misled the court and opposing counsel, and violated multiple professional conduct rules. The appellate court affirmed his disbarment as justified.
Girards Law Firm specializes in severe injury and wrongful death cases, especially those that involve brain damage, heart damage, spinal cord injuries or severe burns in Texas, Arkansas and Oklahoma. Contact us at www.girardslaw.com by using the chat feature for more information.