In re Spellman

This disciplinary proceeding arises out of three charges that in 1949 respondent failed to make proper remittance to clients of the proceeds of collections.

*216The first charge recites an unjustified withholding of the proceeds of a settlement of a lawsuit from one of two clients whom respondent represented in the lawsuit. This charge was not sustained by the proof. What appears at most is a divergence of views as to the proper allocation of disbursements for expenses in respondent’s mathematical computation of the contingent fee, and there is involved only a minor discrepancy.

The second charge…