Solicitor Disciplinary Tribunal Decisions

Details for Moya O'Donnell

Name

Moya O'Donnell

Address

Moya O’Donnell & Co, Solicitors, Elm Wood Terrace, Main Street, Killybegs, Co Donegal, and Glen Road, Glenties, Co Donegal

Date of Order

18/02/2019

Decision

In the matter of Moya O’Donnell, solicitor, practising as Moya O’Donnell & Co, Solicitors, Elm Wood Terrace, Main Street, Killybegs, Co Donegal, and Glen Road, Glenties, Co Donegal, and in the matter of the Solicitors Acts 1954-2015 [2018/DT34; High Court 2017/86 SA; High Court 2019/7 SA]

Law Society of Ireland (applicant)

Moya O’Donnell (respondent solicitor)

On 6 November 2018, the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found the respondent solicitor guilty of misconduct in her practice as a solicitor in that she:

1)  Caused or allowed an incorrect reporting accountant’s report for the financial year ending 31 March 2015 to be filed with the Society, which recorded a client deficit of €2,199, when there was a deficit in excess of €100,000 due to a large debit balance on a named client ledger,

2)   Dishonestly caused or permitted a distribution/cash account(s) to be created and provided to the Society in respect of the estate of a named client, knowing it to falsely represent that a named client was a beneficiary of the estate, in an attempt to conceal a deficit on the named client estate of €32,831, which arose from the use of moneys from the named client estate to pay the named client moneys due to her from the estate of a different named client,

3)   Dishonestly caused or permitted multiple deficits on her client account by payment of client moneys into her personal bank or credit card accounts and by payment of client moneys, held and/or due to particular clients, to other unrelated client matters, involving some 51 separate incidents of such activity,

4)   Attempted to conceal deficits on her client account by causing or allowing false entries in the books of account to conceal the true destination of the payment(s),

5)   Attempted to conceal deficits on her client account by engaging in a widespread practice of teeming and lading of client moneys,

6)   Attempted to avoid detection by the Law Society of deficits and of the practice of teeming and lading of client moneys by use of false documentation, including in particular:

           ·     A letter dated 29 August 2012 purporting to vouch a payment of €58,890 (at appendix 9.3 of the investigation report of              10 November 2017) from a named client estate, and/or

·     Letters dated 30 January 2014 and 17 February 2014 purporting to vouch a payment of €80,000 (at appendix 9.4 of the investigation report) from the same named client estate, and/or

·     A letter dated 2 September 2015 purporting to vouch a payment of €63,028 (at appendix 9.6 of the investigation report) from the same named client estate, and/or

·     A document purporting to vouch a payment of €86,000 (at appendix 9.7 of the investigation report) from the same named client estate, and/or

·     A document purporting to vouch instruction of a payment of €76,000 (at appendix 12.2 of the investigation report) from the file of a named client, and/or

·     A document purporting to record an electronic funds transfer of €5,000 (at appendix 13.3 of the investigation report) to another named client on 8 December 2016, and/or

·     A letter dated 14 July 2017 purporting to be from the Revenue Commissioners purporting to vouch a payment of €14,050 on a named client estate, and/or

·     A document (at appendix 14.5 of the investigation report) purporting to vouch an electronic funds transfer of a bequest of €4,361 to a named beneficiary.

7)   Dishonestly furnished or permitted to be furnished to the Society further documentation in an attempt to conceal deficits and/or teeming and lading on her client account, and in particular:

·     A copy questionnaire purportedly completed by a named client, falsely showing her to be a beneficiary to a named client estate, and/or

·     A copy cheque payable to a named client with annotation falsely vouching a payment from the same named client estate, and/or

·     A document of 25 August 2017 falsely vouching a payment of €5,000 to a named client, a beneficiary of the same named client estate, and/or

·     An affidavit in the name of a named client signed 18 November 2017 purporting to vouch payments on another named client estate, and/or

·     An affidavit in the name of a named client signed 18 November 2017 purporting to vouch payments on another named client estate, and/or

·     Copy identification documents of two named clients with the same name, purporting to support her false claim that there was a beneficiary to a named client estate by the name of this named client.

The tribunal, in its opinion as to the fitness of the respondent solicitor to be a member of the solicitors’ profession, expressed in its report the following recommendations:

1)   The respondent solicitor was not a fit person to be a member of the solicitors’ profession,

2)   Her name should be struck off the Roll of Solicitors,

3)   She should pay the measured costs of the Law Society.

The tribunal ordered and directed the Law Society to bring its findings and the recommendations in its report to the High Court. The matter came before the High Court and, on 18 February 2019, the High Court ordered that the name of the respondent solicitor be struck off the Roll of Solicitors.