See Original DocumentDownload PDF

Virginia

BEFORE THE FOURTH DISTRICT - SECTION 1 COMMITTEE OF THE VIRGINIA STATE BAR

IN THE MATTER OF

CLAUDIA JOY ZUCKER

VSB Docket No. 07-041-0908

FOURTH DISTRICT - SECTION 1 COMMITTEE DETERMINATION

(PUBLIC REPRIMAND WITHOUT TERMS)

On August 12, 2009 and November 19, 2009, hearings in this matter were held before a duly convened Fourth District - Section I Committee of the Virginia State Bar ("Committee") panel consisting of R. Frances O'Brien, Esq, Chair, Jason S. Rucker, Esq., Dennis W. Cuppy, lay member, Lisa A. Wilson, Esq., Brendan K. Feeley, Esq., Julia A. Connally, lay member, Patricia E. Bruce, Esq..

Respondent appeared in person with counsel Bernard J. DiMuro, Esq., Stanley S. Lieberman, Esq. and Stacey Rose Harris, Esq. Debra Fitzgerald-O'Connell, Esq, appeared as Acting Assistant Bar Counsel for the Virginia State Bar. Crystal Y. Twitty, Esq., Assistant Attorney General appeared on behalf of Virginia State Bar Counsel Seth Guggenheim and Barbara Balogh, Assistant Ethics Counsel.

Pursuant to Part 6, Section IV, Paragraph 13-16 (Z)(2) of the Rules of the Virginia Supreme Court, the herein named Committee of the Virginia State Bar hereby serves upon the Respondent the following Public Reprimand, as set forth below:

Findings of Fact

  1. At all time relevant, Respondent was an attorney licensed to practice law in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
  2. On August 15, 2006, Respondent testified as an expert witness for Respondent Patrick Tzeuton, in a practitioner disciplinary proceeding styled as In the Matter of Patrick Tzeuton Disciplinary No. D 2005-291, in the United States Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review, Board of Immigration Appeals, the Honorable Thomas L. Pullen, presiding.
  3. During cross-examination of Respondent, Jennifer Barnes, Esq., Bar Counsel for U.S. Department of Justice, Executive Office of Immigration Review, Office of the General Counsel, questioned Respondent regarding Respondent's disciplinary history with the Virginia State Bar as follows:.. "To your knowledge, have you ever had a complaint filed against you with the Virginia bar or any other state bar authorities?"

    An objection was made and overruled, after which Responded replied as follows:

    1. A. "Yes, and I have never been found guilty of anything."
      2. Counsel then inquired, and Respondent replied as follows:
    2. Q. "I have a follow, I have a follow-up question for you. Could you tell me the nature of the complaint filed against you?"
    3. A. "No, I cannot."
    4. Q. "You don't know?"
    5. "I believe it's irrelevant."
      6. The Court overruled the objections to the follow-up question to Respondent and directed Respondent to respond. Respondent requested that counsel restate the question. As follows is the subsequent line of questioning:
    6. Q. "What was the complaint filed against you?"
    7. A. "Which one?"
    8. Q. "All of them"
    9. A. "I don't know. It's been years."
    10. Q. "You don't recall the complain, the basis of the complaint. Well then, tell me what the result of the complaint was. Were there-"
    11. A. "Dismissed."
    12. Q. "- any sanctions imposed?"
    13. A. "No."
    14. Q. "No confidential discipline?"
    15. A. "No."
    16. Q. And were you represented by counsel on these proceedings?"
    17. A. "No."
    18. Q. "You represented yourself?"
    19. A. "Yeah."
  4. At the time of her testimony Respondent had in fact received confidential discipline, and had a disciplinary record consisting of a Private Reprimand with terms dated November 30, 2004.
  5. In addition to the foregoing, and contrary to her testimony, Respondent was represented by Joseph F. Cunningham, Esq. and his law firm, Joseph F. Cunningham & Associates, PLC in the 2004 proceeding for which she received a Private Reprimand.

II. NATURE OF MISCONDUCT

The Committee unanimously finds that the following Rules of Professional Conduct have been violated by the Respondent:

  1. RULE 3.3 CANDOR TOWARD THE TRIBUNAL

    (a) A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal;

  2. RULE 8.4 MISCONDUCT

    8.4 MISCONDUCT It is professional misconduct for a lawyer to: (c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation which reflects adversely on the lawyer's fitness to practice law;

III. PUBLIC REPRIMAND WITHOUT TERMS

Accordingly, it is the unanimous decision of the Fourth District - Section I Committee of the Virginia State Bar to impose upon Claudia Joy Zucker the sanction of a Public Reprimand Without Terms and the Respondent is hereby so sanctioned and reprimanded.

Pursuant to Paragraph 13-9.E.(1) of the Rules of Court, the Clerk of the Disciplinary System shall assess costs.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on December 11, 2009 2009, a true copy of the Fourth District - Section I Committee Determination (Public Reprimand was mailed to Claudia Joy Zucker, Respondent, by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, at 1840 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 205, Arlington, VA 22201, Respondent's last address of record with the Virginia State Bar, and via regular first class mail to Bernard J. DiMuro, Esq., Respondent's Counsel, at DiMuro Ginsberg, PC, 908 King Street, Suite 200, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.