Haddonfield Lawyer Gets 6-Month Suspension for Neglect, Misrepresentation in Divorce Case
The lawyer failed to answer discovery requests and failed to serve her own discovery requests within the allotted time.
March 27, 2020 at 03:38 PM
3 minute read
The New Jersey Supreme Court has imposed a six-month suspension on Haddonfield attorney Susan Lowden for lying to a client about the status of his case in order to conceal her neglect of the matter.
The court imposed the suspension on Lowden in an order made public Thursday. Lowden was found in default by a District Ethics Committee after she failed to file an answer to the complaint. Four Disciplinary Review Board members favored a six-month suspension while four others favored a three-month suspension.
The suspension stems from Lowden's representation of Scott Spruill, beginning in 2013, in connection with his divorce. It was a complex case involving a marriage in which one family business was sold and another that filed for bankruptcy.
Lowden failed to answer discovery requests and failed to serve her own discovery requests within the allotted time. For several months in 2016, Lowden repeatedly told Spruill that she was "waiting for a court date," in hopes of misleading him into thinking she had filed a motion that she had not yet filed, according to the Disciplinary Review Board.
An ethics complaint said Lowden engaged in a pattern of putting off Spruill, delaying the process of giving the client any substantive information.
For eight months, she falsely represented to Spruill that his wife's lawyers were not returning her calls, and that delays in the case were the result of waiting for an expert's report. But, in fact, the delays were caused by Spruill's failure to pay an expert's fees, an obligation that Spruill was unaware of because Lowden never notified him about it, the complaint said.
In the fall of 2016, Lowden failed to notify Spruill about a motion to strike his pleadings, with prejudice, and failed to oppose the motion. She also failed to provide him a copy of a January 2017 order addressing his failure to pay discovery.
The court found Lowden engaged in ethics violations for gross neglect, lack of diligence, failure to keep a client informed, failure to explain a matter to a client, failure to set forth in writing the basis of a legal fee, failure to cooperate with disciplinary authorities, and conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
Lowden was already suspended effective April 2019 for failure to comply with a directive of a Fee Arbitration Committee. She received a reprimand in 2014 for repeatedly misrepresenting to another client the status of his case, and in 2016 she was censured for misrepresenting to a client in a different case that she had filed a complaint.
The phone at Lowden's Haddonfield office is disconnected, and she could not be located for comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAppellate Div. Follows Fed Reasoning on Recusal for Legislator-Turned-Judge
4 minute readChiesa Shahinian Bolsters Corporate Practice With 5 From Newark Boutique
5 minute read'A Mockery' of Deposition Rules: Walgreens Wins Sanctions Dispute Over Corporate Witness Allegedly Unfamiliar With Company
Trending Stories
- 1Formal Charges Filed Against Judge Accused of Helping Defendant Escape ICE Detention
- 2Top 10 Predicted Business and Human Rights Issues for 2025
- 3$7.5M in Punitive Damages Awarded in Product Liability Case
- 4Does My Company Really Need a Generative AI Policy?
- 5'This Is a Watershed Moment': Daniel's Law Overcomes Major Hurdle
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250