LITTLE ROCK — Q. Byrum Hurst, a lawyer and candidate for U.S. Congress, was sanctioned Thursday by the state Supreme Court’s Committee on Professional Conduct.
Hurst was fined $1,000 and formally reprimanded for missing a deadline to file an appeal for a client by one day.
He argued in his response to the committee that he acted with reasonable diligence and promptness to make sure to meet the deadline, but was stymied by problems with new software his office was using.
The action was the latest in a long history of disciplinary actions against Hurst by the attorney disciplinary committee.
Hurst will face state Sen. Gene Jeffress of Louann in a June 12 runoff for the Democratic Party’s nomination in the 4th Congressional District.
Hurst was representing Richard Stephen Frederick in a criminal case in Saline County Circuit Court. He advised his client to plead no contest to one charge of sexual indecency with a child, with the condition that he could appeal the court’s denial of a motion to dismiss the case for a speedy-trial violation.
The deadline for filing the re co rd with the Arkansas Supreme Court clerk was Jan. 9. When Hurst tendered the record Jan. 10, the clerk refused to file it because it was late. The Supreme Court referred the matter to the Office of Professional Conduct, which is responsible for disciplining attorneys.
Hurst said in response that his office had installed a new version of its time-management system program, but it crashed, resulting in the loss of deadlines that had been entered in. He said he checked with office staff sev- eral times to make sure the correct filing dates were recorded, and his assistant said in an affidavit that it was her mistake that caused the late filing.
The committee found that Hurst violated two rules governing attorney conduct: a rule requiring that a lawyer act with “reasonable diligence and promptness” in representing a client, and one requiring that a lawyer not engage in conduct that is “prejudicial to the administration of justice.”
Hurst denied violating those rules in his response to the committee.
Hurst said Thursday that the incident was a small one that had no adverse impact on the case or the client — the Supreme Court granted his motion to file the transcript a day late.
“I thought that was too severe,” he said of the penalty. “It unfortunately occurs to every lawyer occasionally or at some point in their career. Usually it’s a smaller fine or a caution.”
But he said he did not want to appeal the decision and would pay the fine.
In its opinion, the committee stated that it considered Hurst’s disciplinary record. Hurst has been licensed in Arkansas since 1974 and has been publicly sanctioned by the committee 11 times since 1983, either with a caution or a reprimand.
Stark Ligon, executive director of the committee, said that’s a high number.
“I’m not trying to use words or terms to influence anything that might be happening in three weeks, but based on the 1
11/2 years I’ve been here, that is a lot of public sanctions for any lawyer, even one who’s been licensed and practicing for 38 years,” he said.
In total, Hurst has been ordered to pay $28,000 in penalties. The largest was in 2009, when Hurst was ordered to pay $25,000 in restitution to a former client after she complained that Hurst did not return documents to her or return the unearned advanced payment when he was terminated as the attorney for her brother.
Hurst said he did not think the release would hinder his congressional campaign.
“I’m rather proud of my legal career,” he said. “Most people that know me, judges and lawyers, know that I practice law very diligently.”
Hurst also has a history of delinquency in paying various state and federal taxes, which caused questions to be raised during the campaign. A spokesman said earlier this month that Hurst has resolved $25,550 in state liens filed against him and is working to resolve a $32,730 federal lien stemming from unpaid income taxes.
Also Thursday, the disciplinary committee reprimanded attorney Ralph Theodor Stricker for having a romantic relationship with a client while he represented her in a personal-injury claim.
The committee ruled that Stricker’s conduct violated a rule barring a lawyer from having sexual relations with a client unless the relationship predates the lawyer-client relationship.
Stricker was assessed $50 in costs.
Arkansas, Pages 11 on 05/25/2012