In re Grella
777 N.E.2d 167, 2002 Mass. LEXIS 792, 438 Mass. 47 (2002)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An attorney's commission of a violent criminal act, such as domestic assault and battery, adversely reflects on their fitness to practice law and generally warrants a suspension, with the disciplinary focus being on the nature of the violent conduct itself rather than the formal classification of the crime as a misdemeanor or felony.
Facts:
- In May 1998, attorney Paul J. Grella and his wife separated following unsuccessful marital counseling.
- On July 29, 1998, after midnight, Grella entered his estranged wife's home and bedroom without her permission.
- When she awoke and asked him to leave, Grella refused and began a violent physical assault that lasted for approximately four hours.
- During the assault, Grella pushed his wife on the bed, lay on top of her, covered her mouth, slapped her, pulled her hair, and ripped her clothing.
- The victim feared for her life and begged him to stop, at one point reminding him of their children.
- After Grella left at 5:45 a.m., the victim called 911; police later observed and photographed her injuries, which included a bloody lip.
Procedural Posture:
- Paul J. Grella pleaded guilty and was convicted in Superior Court of one misdemeanor count of assault and battery against his estranged wife.
- Bar counsel initiated a disciplinary proceeding against Grella based on the conviction.
- The matter was referred to the Board of Bar Overseers (board), where a hearing committee recommended a two-month suspension from the practice of law.
- The full board adopted the hearing committee's findings and recommendation.
- A single justice of the Supreme Judicial Court reviewed the matter, rejected the board's recommendation, and ordered a six-month suspended sentence with conditions.
- Bar counsel, the appellant, appealed the single justice's decision to the full Supreme Judicial Court, arguing the sanction was inadequate.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a two-month suspension from the practice of law the appropriate disciplinary sanction for an attorney who was convicted of a misdemeanor for a violent, four-hour assault on his estranged wife?
Opinions:
Majority - Marshall, C.J.
Yes. A two-month suspension is the appropriate sanction for the respondent's conduct. The court holds that a lawyer's violent conduct is antithetical to the privilege of practicing law, which is fundamentally about resolving conflicts without violence. The primary factor in determining the sanction is the effect upon the public and the bar, and domestic violence is a particularly egregious act that adversely reflects on a lawyer's fitness. While a longer suspension might have been warranted, the court gives substantial deference to the Board of Bar Overseers' recommendation, which was based on the fact that this was a single incident and not a pattern of abuse. The court emphasizes that the nature of the assault is more important than its classification as a misdemeanor, and that suspension is the generally warranted discipline for such violent acts by an attorney.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the principle that an attorney's violent personal conduct, particularly domestic abuse, is a matter of professional concern that warrants significant discipline. It clarifies that the legal system will not treat such violence as a purely private matter, but as conduct that undermines the integrity and public perception of the legal profession. By focusing on the nature of the act rather than the criminal classification (misdemeanor vs. felony), the court broadens the scope for disciplinary action in cases of attorney misconduct. This precedent signals that attorneys in Massachusetts convicted of violent crimes, especially domestic assault, should expect a suspension from the practice of law.
