Today, the Tennessee Supreme Court suspended Fred C. Dance, a Williamson County attorney, from practicing law for five years, with three years to be served on active suspension. Mr. Dance committed multiple violations of the Court’s Rules of Professional Conduct by mishandling client funds.
In 2017, Mr. Dance represented a client in a wrongful death lawsuit. The client settled the lawsuit for $20,000, and the opposing party sent a check for that amount to Mr. Dance. Although Mr. Dance deposited the funds into his Interest on Lawyer Trust Account, he then used the funds for personal expenses instead of disbursing them to his client. He did not disburse the funds to his client for nearly four years, and only after his client filed a complaint with the Board of Professional Responsibility.
A hearing panel concluded that Mr. Dance had violated Rules 1.4(a)(3), 1.4(a)(4), 1.15(a), 1.15(d), 8.4(a), and 8.4(c) of the Tennessee Rules of Professional Conduct. And it recommended that Mr. Dance be disbarred from the practice of law.
Although Mr. Dance admitted to the misconduct, he challenged the hearing panel’s recommendation that he be disbarred. He argued that the hearing panel had applied the wrong presumptive sanction under the standards published by the American Bar Association. Moreover, he argued that the hearing panel should not have applied certain aggravating factors and had overlooked other mitigating factors. Finally, Mr. Dance pointed to more lenient punishments imposed on lawyers committing similar misconduct as evidence that disbarment was a comparatively harsh sanction.
As a preliminary matter, the Tennessee Supreme Court clarified that the standard of review for a hearing panel’s recommended punishment in an appeal under Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 9, section 33.1(d) is de novo rather than abuse of discretion. The Court affirmed the hearing panel’s determination that Mr. Dance had knowingly converted client property and that the presumptive sanction therefore was disbarment. The Court also affirmed the hearing panel’s application of aggravating and mitigating factors. But after considering the sanctions imposed in cases involving similar attorney misconduct, the Court concluded that Mr. Dance should receive a less severe penalty than disbarment. Accordingly, the Court modified Mr. Dance’s punishment from disbarment to a five-year suspension, with three years to be served on active suspension.
To read the Court’s unanimous opinion in Dance v. Board of Professional Responsibility, authored by Justice Sarah K. Campbell, visit the Supreme Court opinions section of TNCourts.gov.