Discipline Decision – 1990
After a hearing into the matter, the Disciplinary Panel found several serious infractions of the Code of Professional Conduct. Benchers decided that Harvey had indeed violated several of the provisions in the Code. They suspended him for a minimum of 30 days, ordered that he pay the Society’s costs of the investigation and required that he successfully complete a written exam based on the Code before resuming his practice again.
Discipline Decision – 1991
Clients Mr. and Mrs. A made a complaint to the Law Society that Harvey, the lawyer for Mr. A, had acted improperly with respect to a piece of property. The Panel of the Discipline committee found that the property documents drafted by the lawyer would have been designed to deprive Mrs. A of her matrimonial property rights. The Panel concluded that Harvey was guilty of professional misconduct.
Benchers agreed with the Panel that the lawyer had violated three sections of the CBA Code of Professional Conduct. Benchers suspended Harvey from practice for a period of 3 months and ordered that he pay the costs of the Law Society’s investigation and hearing of the complaint.
Harvey appealed the decision of Benchers to the Newfoundland Supreme Court, Trial Division on the ground, inter alia, that the Society’s 2 year delay in dealing with the complaint meant that he was denied a fair hearing. The Court allowed the appeal on the ground(s) that a fundamental breach of natural justice and/or denial of his rights under s.7 of the Charter had occurred. The Court quashed the Law Society’s decision and order.
Discipline Decision – 1991
It was alleged that Douglas Harvey had:
The Discipline Committee, after a hearing in the matter, reported to Benchers that Harvey had pled guilty to the complaint. Benchers decided that Harvey was guilty of professional misconduct. They suspended him for a period of 3 months and ordered that he pay the Society’s costs in relation to the complaint.
Discipline Decision – 1992
A complaint was made to the Law Society that Harvey had requested a person (“Mrs. A.”) to come to his office and advised her that she was in serious trouble for taping telephone conversations with Harvey’s client “Mr. B”, and that she could face life imprisonment for this. An Agreed Statement of Facts was submitted to Benchers in which Harvey admitted to this conduct. Benchers found the lawyer guilty of professional misconduct in that he failed to conduct himself in a manner which would reflect credit on the legal profession and inspire the confidence, respect and trust of the community. Benchers reprimanded him.
Discipline Decision – 2003
An Adjudication Panel of the Discipline Committee, in a Decision dated February 18, 2003 and pursuant to the Law Society Act, 1999, subsection 46(3) found Douglas G. Harvey guilty of conduct deserving of sanction.
Mr. Harvey entered a guilty plea to the following violations of the Code of Professional Conduct:
The Adjudication Panel noted that Mr. Harvey had apologized to both the lay person and to the Law Society. The Panel ordered that the member be reprimanded; that the member pay the expenses incurred by the Law Society in the investigation and hearing of the Complaint; and that publication of the disposition of the Complaint be made in accordance with Law Society rule 9.28.