Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCAD-XX-XXXXXXX
27-AUG-2021
02:48 PM
Dkt. 9 OSUS
SCAD-XX-XXXXXXX
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL,
Petitioner,
vs.
BRIAN LEBON CALPIN, (HI Bar #7370),
Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(ODC Case No. 21-0098)
ORDER OF RECIPROCAL SUSPENSION
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Wilson, and Eddins, JJ.)
Upon consideration of the July 10, 2021 petition for
issuance of a reciprocal discipline notice upon Respondent Brian
LeBon Calpin, filed by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel
pursuant to Rule 2.15 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the
State of Hawai#i (RSCH), the lack of response from Respondent
Calpin to this court’s July 20, 2021 Notice and Order, and the
record in this matter, we find that, on May 7, 2020, Respondent
Calpin was suspended in New Jersey for one year, for, in four
different cases, neglecting client matters, lacking diligence,
failing to keep a client reasonably informed of the status of the
representation, engaging in a conflict of interest with a client,
failing to promptly deliver client property to the client,
including upon termination of a representation, failing to
cooperate with disciplinary authorities, and engaging in
deceitful conduct, in violation of the New Jersey equivalents of
Rules 1.1, 1.3, 1.4(a)(3), 1.9(c)(1), 1.15(d), 1.16(d), 8.4(c)
and 8.4(g) of the Hawai#i Rules of Professional Conduct
(HRPC)(2014) and that subsequently, on June 25, 2020, Respondent
Calpin was indefinitely suspended by the New Jersey Supreme Court
until such time as he complied with a fee arbitration order and
paid a sanction to the New Jersey Disciplinary Oversight
Committee. We conclude that a similar, reciprocal discipline is
warranted in this jurisdiction. Therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Calpin’s license
to practice law in this jurisdiction is suspended for one year,
pursuant to RSCH Rules 2.3(a)(2) and 2.15(c), effective upon
entry of this order, notwithstanding RSCH Rule 2.16(c), in light
of Respondent Calpin’s current administrative suspension.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Calpin shall bear
any costs associated with these reciprocal disciplinary
proceedings, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.3(c), upon approval of a
timely-submitted verified bill of costs by the Office of
Disciplinary Counsel.
2
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Calpin’s
reinstatement to practice in this jurisdiction is contingent upon
submission of proof of compliance with all of the subsequent
conditions imposed by the New Jersey Supreme Court for his
reinstatement in that jurisdiction, along with proof of his
reinstatement and good standing in New Jersey.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, August 27, 2021.
/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Michael D. Wilson
/s/ Todd W. Eddins
3
Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Calpin
Combined Opinion