IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
IN THE MATTER OF DISCIPLINE OF No. 61883
ROBIN W. ENOS, ESQ., CALIFORNIA
BAR NO. 152612. FILED
JUL 3 1 2014
TRACIr K. LINDEMAN
CLV2Ksp
BY
CHIE1 DEP
ORDER OF INJUNCTION
This is an automatic review, pursuant to SCR 105(3)(b), of a
Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board hearing panel's recommendation
that former California attorney Robin W. Enos be enjoined from practicing
law in Nevada, that he be fined $5,000, and that he pay the costs of the
disciplinary proceedings.' The panel's recommendation was based on its
conclusion that Enos violated RPC 1.15 (safekeeping property), RPC 5.3
(responsibilities regarding nonlawyer assistants). and RPC 8.4
(misconduct). Enos did not appear at the disciplinary hearing, nor has he
filed a brief or expressed any intention to contest the panel's findings and
recommendations in this matter.
The record reflects that Claudio Gonzalez went to the Las
Vegas office of a company advertising assistance in obtaining loan
'The record indicates that in 2011, Enos resigned from the
California bar with disciplinary charges pending. Although Enos is not
licensed to practice law in Nevada, this court has jurisdiction to impose
professional discipline on him. See SCR 99(1); In re Discipline of Droz, 123
Nev. 163, 167-68, 160 P.3d 881, 884 (2007).
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
(0) I947A
modifications. Gonzalez sought such a modification and paid fees for those
services by writing two checks payable to Enos. On a subsequent visit to
the office, Gonzalez discovered that the office was out of business and left
no forwarding address. When Gonzalez contacted the Nevada State Bar,
he learned that Enos was not licensed to practice law in this state.
In response to the bar's investigation of Gonzalez's grievance,
Enos wrote a letter stating that Gonzalez was never his client and that he
had no office in Las Vegas. He also stated that the loan modification
company was owned by another person, who is not an attorney. Enos
admitted that he was general counsel for the loan modification business,
and that he held fees paid to the company in his trust account. Enos
claimed that he tried to mediate the disagreement between Gonzalez and
the company owner, and that, ultimately, no modification was obtained for
Gonzalez.
The bar subsequently filed a complaint against Enos, alleging
the foregoing and that Enos had committed misconduct in Nevada. The
complaint also alleged that Enos's biographical information appeared on
the loan modification company's website, and that Gonzalez never received
a refund from the loan modification company and ultimately lost his home.
When Enos failed to timely file an answer or otherwise respond to the
complaint, the bar served him notice that, if he did not file an answer, it
intended to proceed on a default basis and all charges against him would
be admitted. SCR 105(2) ("In the event the attorney fails to plead, the
charges shall be deemed admitted."). Enos failed to respond to the notice
and failed to appear at the subsequent disciplinary panel hearing.
When imposing discipline on an attorney who is not licensed
in this state, sanctions must be tailored accordingly. Droz, 123 Nev. at
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
2
(0) 1947A 9ce
168, 160 P.3d at 884. Appropriate sanctions in such circumstances include
injunctive relief, fines, and payments of costs. Id. at 168, 160 P.3d at 884-
85.
Having reviewed the record, we conclude that clear and
convincing evidence supports the panel's findings. SCR 105(2)(f); In re
Discipline of Drakulich, 111 Nev. 1556, 1566, 908 P.2d 709, 715 (1995).
We further determine that the sanctions recommended by the disciplinary
panel are warranted. In re Discipline of Stuhff, 108 Nev. 629, 633, 837
P.2d 853, 855 (1992). We therefore approve the panel's recommendation.
Enos is hereby enjoined from practicing law in Nevada or appearing as
counsel before any tribunal in Nevada; Enos is required to petition this
court to lift this injunction prior to being eligible to practice law in Nevada
or appear in any Nevada court. Within 90 days from the date of this
order, Enos shall pay a fine of $5,000 and the costs of the disciplinary
proceeding to the state bar.
It is so ORDERED
Ri -Ad
g , C.J.
Gibbons
Hardesty
icpt, (Act, 1_04,3
Parraguirre Douglas
J.
CRMrry Saitta
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
3
(o) 1947A e.
cc: Jeffrey R. Albregts, Chair, Southern Nevada Disciplinary Board
David A. Clark, Bar Counsel
Kimberly K. Farmer, Executive Director, State Bar of Nevada
Robin W. Enos
Perry Thompson, Admissions Office, United States Supreme Court
SUPREME COURT
OF
NEVADA
4
(0) 1947A ate47.