|
Allan
Knappenberger, a native Portlander, got his law degree from
the University of Notre Dame.
Knappenberger's
sole discipline from the state bar has been three letters
of admonition, essentially a mild reprimand.
Portland
lawyer Craig Crispin is
representing some Knappenberger employees who say their
boss asked them to overbill clients.
|
|
After nearly three decades of brushing off disgruntled
clients and angry colleagues like flies, Portland divorce
lawyer Allan Knappenberger may finally get stung.
In his 27 years of practice, Knappenberger has racked up
a mind-boggling 79 bar complaints, mainly from former clients
and fellow lawyers ("S.O.B., Esq.," WW, March 22,
2000). Despite his unsavory reputation, the Oregon State
Bar has been unable to slap a significant reprimand on the
notoriously abrasive and hyper-litigious lawyer. That could
soon change, thanks to a complaint from an unlikely source:
his employees.
Last month one former and three current employees filed
a lawsuit against Knappenberger. Their suit includes several
typical complaints, from the failure to pay overtime to
forcing them to work in an unsafe workplace. But buried
on the second-to-last page, almost as an afterthought, is
a damning charge. The four women allege that Knappenberger
required his employees to "assist in the billing of clients
for work not done."
Almost half of Knappenberger's bar complaints involve allegations
of overbilling. The Oregon State Bar, the lawyers' trade
association that is mandated by the state to self-police,
rarely investigates such claims, instead referring people
to voluntary fee arbitration. But now that this allegation
is being made by Knappenberger's own employees, it may jack
up the heat on the lawyer to a new level.
"That's incredible," said Richard Weill, a Troutdale lawyer
who has served as a volunteer bar prosecutor on ethics complaints,
and who himself has a complaint pending against Knappenberger.
"If that is proven true, that would be conduct that involves
such a level of dishonesty as to warrant disbarment."
The question now is whether the state bar will be forced
to investigate. Jeff Sapiro, head of bar enforcement, acknowledged
that the bar has the power to investigate such allegations
even if no official bar complaint is filed.
Knappenberger continued his policy of not commenting to
the press. His attorney, Paul Buchanan, says, "He's a private
person and he doesn't talk to the media, and that's been
his policy for 27 years."
Even if the bar decides to look the other way, Knappenberger
will have his hands full in court. The lawsuit, filed by
Suzanne Travis, Candace Duncan, Lisa Maddocks and Kathrine
Clark, involves only $8,000 of unpaid wages, but factors
in other allegations in asking for $2.4 million.
Besides asking for the employees to be compensated for
emotional distress and punitive damages, the suit also claims
that two of the employees suffered injuries to their arms,
wrists and shoulders because of the overwork and unsafe
conditions. The suit claims emotional damages based on,
among other things, how Knappenberger allegedly has thrown
documents and files at his employees.
Last week the suit was amended to allege, in essence, that
Knappen-berger has been making his employees' lives even
more miserable in retaliation for their lawsuit, in violation
of state law. The employees' attorney, Craig Crispin, declined
to elaborate on the allegations. But in the documents filed
last week, the four women claim that Knappenberger has been
"engaging in the increased use of abusive language," making
hostile comments relating to the suit, and setting unreasonable
deadlines for an increased volume of work.
That's not the only legal headache Knappenberger faces.
A dozen of his ex-clients have consulted with a lawyer,
John Sather, to file legal malpractice suits against Knappenberger.
Sather says he will start filing next week.
Sather's clients are disgruntled, he acknowledges, "but
they seem to have pretty good reason to be disgruntled."
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Willamette Week | originally
published April 12,
2000
|
