Login | April 20, 2024
Cleveland attorney suspended for tampering with email of ex-employer
ANNIE YAMSON
Special to the Legal News
Published: June 28, 2016
The Ohio Supreme Court has suspended a Cleveland lawyer from the practice of law for one year with six months stayed after he tampered with the email communications of his former law firm.
The attorney, Brandon Louis Azman, is a Virginia lawyer who was admitted into the practice of law in Ohio in 2011. He has been registered as inactive since February 2015.
Azman was charged by the Cleveland Metropolitan Bar Association with violating the Rules of Professional Conduct for accessing email communications and then lying about his conduct under oath.
After a hearing in which Azman stipulated to the charges, the Supreme Court’s Board of Professional Conduct recommended a one-year suspension for Azman. The Supreme Court’s per curiam opinion affirmed the board’s recommendation.
According to a summary of the case, Azman worked as an associate attorney for the Piscitelli Law Firm from March 2012 to August 2013, when he was terminated by Frank Piscitelli.
The day after his termination, Azman began accessing the email accounts of Piscitelli and three other firm employees without authorization.
“Indeed, over the following two-and-a-half weeks, he accessed the accounts at least 20 times,” states the high court’s summary. “At one point, firm employees had changed their passwords, but Azman was able to obtain their updated login credentials so that he could continue viewing their emails.”
During that same time period, Azman wrote to Piscitelli asking for a letter of recommendation and proposing a noncompete contract in which he would promise to “make no efforts whatsoever to contact former clients of mine for the purpose of bad mouthing you, to try and steal them away or to convince them to terminate the services of the Piscitelli Law Firm.”
In response, Piscitelli refused to provide a letter of recommendation for Azman because he was fired for poor work performance. Piscitelli also threatened legal action if Azman contacted any firm clients or harassed any firm employees.
The email exchange was forwarded to another employee in the law firm.
After receiving Piscitelli’s reply, Azman logged into the firm’s email accounts and deleted the communications.
Azman was outed when the law firm contacted local police who traced the unauthorized email access to an IP address registered at Azman’s residence.
Piscitelli did not file a criminal complaint against Azman on the condition that he report his own conduct to the bar association, which Azman did on Oct. 11, 2013.
“However, during a subsequent deposition by (the bar association) Azman denied that he had purposely deleted any law firm emails,” the Supreme Court wrote. “Not until his disciplinary hearing did Azman finally admit that he had also deleted emails while he had access to the accounts.”
The board found that Azman engaged in three types of misconduct: unlawfully altering, destroying or concealing material having potential evidentiary value, engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud deceit or misrepresentation and knowingly making a false statement of material fact in connection with a disciplinary matter.
“We agree with these findings of misconduct,” wrote the Supreme Court.
The high court cited the board’s findings of aggravating factors including Azman’s “selfish motive” and pattern of wrongful conduct over a two-week period. It also pointed out his lies during the disciplinary process.
“In mitigation, the board noted that Azman has no prior discipline, he ultimately acknowledged the wrongful nature of his conduct, his misconduct did not involve the provision of legal services or negatively impact a client’s case, and he displayed a cooperative attitude toward the disciplinary process, except for his false statement during his deposition,” the high court wrote.
After reviewing the record and considering sanctions imposed in similar cases, the Supreme Court unanimously accepted the board’s findings and imposed the one-year suspension with six months stayed on the condition that Azman commit no further misconduct and pay the costs of the proceedings.
“If Azman fails to comply with the conditions of the stay, the stay will be lifted and he will serve the entire one-year suspension,” the court concluded.
The case is cited Cleveland Metro. Bar Assn. v. Azman, Slip Opinion No. 2016-Ohio-3393.
Copyright © 2016 The Daily Reporter - All Rights Reserved