TO BE PUBLISHED §§npreme Tnnrt of glien , w N AL 2016 sc 000532-1<13 j ' @ATEwl%/lw ¢z.'.». alma ‘KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION MOVANT V. IN SUPREME COURT JAMES NEAL TILSON RESPONDENT OPINION AND ORDER Respondent, James Neal Tilson, is licensed toipractice law in Kentucky and was previously licensed in Arizona. In October 2014, he Was silspended in Arizona for three years, and inl May _2015, this Court imposed identical reciprocal discipline. See Kentucky BarAss’n v. Tilson, 460 S.W.3d 333 (Ky. 2015). Following this, additional disciplinary proceedings Were commenced in Arizona, and in November 2015, Tilson Was permanently disbarred in that state by consent. See In re Tilson, No. PDJ-2015-9106 (Nov. lO, 2015) (Judgrnent of Disbarment).1 The Kentucl phone number. Tilson did not inform Urzua of his suspension, nor did he lterminate_the representation upon his suspension.` (9) Jose Alfredo Castro hired Tilson in a foreclosure action in April 2014, with a $1,000 initial fee and $500 monthly fee.1 Castro paid $6,500 through March 2015, when he discovered that Tilson had done no work in the case. Tilson repeatedly assured Castro that he was working on the case, but eventually quit responding to Castro’s inquires and disappeared from his office. Tilson never even contacted Castro’sbank, and never revealed his suspension. In all nine cases, Tilson failed to respond to inquiries from the Arizona State Bar. k Tilson was charged with misconduct in all nine cases. He was alleged to~ have Violated the following Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct: - Rule 1.2, scope of representation and allocation of authority (nine violations) . l - Rule 1.3, diligence (nine counts). 4 - Rule 1.3, communication (nine counts). v - Rule 1.5, fees and fee arrangements (nine counts). - Rule 1.7, conflict of interest (six counts). ~ Rule 1.15, safekeeping'of client property (four counts). - Rule 1.16, duties of termination of representation (four counts). - Rule 3.1, meritorious claims and counterclaims (two counts). - Rule 3.2, expediting litigation (two counts). `- Rule 8.1, disciplinary matters (nine counts). - Rule 8_.4, misconduct involving dishonesty and misconduct prejudicial to the administration of justice (nine counts). In all but one of these instances, Kentucky has a parallel rule that is substantively the same. The exception is Arizona’s bar on conduct prejudicial l to the administration of justice. However, the other state’s rules need not be identical to Kentucky’sfor this Court to impose reciprocal discipline. K`entucky' 4BarAss’n v. Trianer, 277 S.W.3d 604 (Ky. 2009). ` Once the proceedings began in Arizona, Tilsonacknowledged that a formal complaint had been filed against him, declined to contest or defend the charges, and consented to disbarment. He also agreed to reimburse each of the former clients described above, for a total of $63,000, and was ordered to pay the costs of the Arizona proceeding. The Arizona judgment of disbarment was entered November 10, 2015. The Arizona order is a .“final adjudication in another jurisdiction that an attorney has been guilty of misconduct” and “shall establish conclusively the 5 misconduct for purposes of a disciplinary proceeding in this State.” SCR 3.435(4)(0). Under Kentucky Supreme Court Rule 3.435(4), a lawyer shall be subject to identical discipline in the Comm_onwealth of Kentucky “unless [he] proves by substantial evidence: (a) a lack of jurisdiction or fraud in the out-of~ state disciplinary proceeding, or -(b) that the misconduct established warrants substantially different discipline in this State.” SCR 3.435(4)(a)-(b)4. Although he was given the opportunity to make these showings, Tilson did not do so, having failed to respond to this Court’s show-cause order. Moreover, this Court sees no reason why Tilson should not be subjected to identical discipline in this state._ l Order Seeing no reason why'Tilson should not be subjected to identical discipline in this state under SCR 3.435,. it is hereby ORDERED that: 1. The Kentucky Bar Association’s petition for reciprocal discipline is GRANTED. Respondent, James Neal Tils'on, is disbarred in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. 2. As stated in SCR 3.390(a), this order shall take effect on the tenth day following its entry. Tilson is instructed to promptly take all reasonable steps to protect the interests of his clients. He shall not accept new clients or collect unearned fees, and shall comply with the provisions of SCR 3.130-7.50(5). 3. AS under scR 3.390, Tilson must, within 10 days after the issuance of this order of disbarment, notify by letter duly placed with the 6 United States Postal Service all courts or other tribunals in which he has matters pending, and all of his clients of his inability to represent them and of the necessity and urgency of promptly retaining new counsel. Tilson shall simultaneously provide a copy of all such letters of notification to the Office of Bar Counsel. l-Ie shall immediately cancel any pending advertisements, to the extent possible, and shall terminate any advertising activity for the duration of the term of suspension. n k 4. In accordancevwith SCR 3.450, Tilson is directed to pay any costs associated with these disciplinary proceedings against him, should there be any, and execution for such costs inay issue from this Court upon finality of this 'Opinion and Order. All sitting. All concur. ENTERED: December 15, 2016. WW~‘» 4 GHWJUSTICE