Decision record
Earl A. Ferguson
Appeals and appellate references
- Appellate document — relationship to this matter unverified: Howard Jacas (Executor estate Sylbert
- Appellate document — relationship to this matter unverified: Owen Fearon v Gresford Jones
“Unverified” means the upstream page linked an appellate judgment but did not preserve enough context to prove that it was an appeal in this matter.
Allegation / charges
Guilty of Professional Misconduct | Disciplinary Committee decision delivered March 31, 2021. || Reprimanded, Fined, Training Ordered | Disciplinary Committee decision delivered January 26, 2022. View PDF DECISION OF THE DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF THE GENERAL LEGAL COUNCIL COMPLAINT NO: …
Findings — machine-extracted (anthropic-batch:claude-opus-4-8); verify against the decision
Complaint by Wade Morris (son and Executor of Rudolph Morris, deceased) against attorney Earl Ferguson, who handled the sale of the deceased's property. The Attorney received the net proceeds in March 2017 but did not pay them to the deceased before his death in June 2017, disbursed sums on alleged oral instructions without written authorization, failed to place funds in an interest-bearing account, and only paid the Complainant after being threatened with a Fraud Squad report. The Panel found the Attorney guilty of breaching Canons VII(b)(ii) and I(b), constituting professional misconduct. No express finding of dishonesty was made. Sanction was deferred pending a mitigation hearing.
Duties found breached:
Aggravating factors:
- Attorney disavowed knowledge of having received proceeds of sale and only paid over funds after Complainant threatened to report him to the Fraud Squad
- Paid out large sums on alleged oral instructions without written authorization, described as improper and falling short of best practices
- Failed to explain/justify $200,000 payment to a process server
- Failed to explain payments to Barton (rental, refrigerator and stove) and to McFarlane
- Attorney had prepared the deceased's Will and knew the Complainant was the Executor
Mitigating factors:
- Attorney eventually paid the Complainant the full sums ($5,000,000 in Nov 2017 and $4,760,009 in Aug 2020)
- Attorney admitted certain errors in handling the matter
Duties engaged
Other decisions involving this respondent
Matched by respondent name — may include a different person with the same name.
Documents
Source: https://www.generallegalcouncil.org/judgement/earl-a-ferguson-complaint-no-136-of-2019/