Discipline Decision 2024
2024 CanLII 78848 (NL LS) | Baker (Re) | CanLII
Summary
By Order of an Adjudication Tribunal of the Disciplinary Panel of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador dated April 12, 2024, Averill Baker has been disbarred. As a result, Averill Baker has been struck from the Roll of Barristers in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and all her rights and privileges as a member of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador have ceased.
Averill Baker practiced with Baker Law Office at 83 Goodridge Street, St. John’s, NL.
The conduct that was found to be deserving of sanction included:
The Adjudication Tribunal ordered:
Discipline Decision 2023
2023 CanLII 98517 (NL LS) | Baker (Re) | CanLII (Decision on the Complaint)
2023 CanLII 124985 (NL LS) | Baker (Re) | CanLII (Decision on Sanction)
Summary
By Order of an Adjudication Tribunal of the Disciplinary Panel of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador dated November 27, 2023, Averill Baker has been disbarred. As a result, Averill Baker has been struck from the Roll of Barristers in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and all her rights and privileges as a member of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador have ceased.
Averill Baker practiced with Baker Law Office at 83 Goodridge Street, St. John’s, NL.
The conduct that was found to be deserving of sanction included:
The Adjudication Tribunal ordered:
Discipline Decision – 2014
http://www.canlii.org/en/nl/nlls/doc/2014/2014canlii10687/2014canlii10687.html
Summary
TAKE NOTICE THAT an Adjudication Tribunal of the Disciplinary Panel of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador, having conducted a hearing pursuant to the Law Society Act, 1999, found Averill J. Baker, of St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, guilty of conduct deserving of sanction. The Adjudication Tribunal found that Ms. Baker was less than forthright with the Law Society in the Response she provided to the Complaints Authorization Committee during the investigation of allegations with respect to the quality of client service. The Adjudication Tribunal dismissed the Complaint concerning Ms. Baker’s representation of her client. However, the Adjudication Tribunal concluded that Ms. Baker knew or ought to have known that the information that she was providing in the Response to the Complaints Authorization Committee was not correct and could have mislead the Law Society in its investigation of this matter. An excerpt from the decision follows.
Honesty is to be expected of lawyers at all times. It is particularly troubling in this case that the Respondent failed to be absolutely frank and candid in her dealings with the Law Society – the very body that governs the professional conduct of its members. As such the Panel finds that the Respondent has failed to act with the integrity expected of a member of the legal profession pursuant to Chapter I of the Code and has breached the requirement of Chapter XIX of the Code to avoid questionable conduct.
The Adjudication Tribunal ordered, pursuant to subsection 49(2) of the Law Society Act, 1999 that:
Discipline Decision – 2013
http://www.canlii.org/en/nl/nlls/doc/2013/2013canlii87572/2013canlii87572.html
Summary
TAKE NOTICE THAT an Adjudication Tribunal of the Disciplinary Panel of the Law Society of Newfoundland and Labrador, having conducted a hearing pursuant to the Law Society Act, 1999, found Averill J. Baker, of St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, guilty of conduct deserving of sanction. Ms. Baker entered a guilty plea to the charge of failing to comply with the rule respecting The Lawyer as Advocate contained in Chapter IX of the Code of Professional Conduct. The Adjudication Tribunal determined that Ms. Baker was not courteous or respectful to an individual acting as a representative of the Court. The Adjudication Tribunal noted that the obligation to be courteous and respectful to the Courts extends not only to the Judge but also to the Court clerks and other Court administrators. The Adjudication Tribunal opined that the legal profession must strive to treat the Courts, including Court clerks and Court administrators, with courtesy and respect. This obligation applies regardless of whether the lawyer’s communications with Court staff occur in a Court room in front of a public audience or in private over the telephone or through email or similar correspondence.
The Adjudication Tribunal ordered, pursuant to subsection 49(2) of the Law Society Act, 1999 that: