Billy Ponds

DCCA Opinion (August 4, 2022)

Summary: In re Billy L. Ponds. Bar No. 379883. August 4, 2022. The D.C. Court of Appeals disbarred Ponds for reckless misappropriation. Although the record before the Hearing Committee and the Board on Professional Responsibility addressed a number of alleged violations involving two different clients, the court’s decision focused on the allegation that Ponds recklessly misappropriated client funds belonging to one client by impermissibly failing to treat an unearned flat fee as client property. Specifically, the court concluded that Ponds’s fee agreement and his conduct in the case were fundamentally incompatible with the requirements of In re Mance. His fee agreement did not make clear that the unearned portion of a flat fee must be returned; it indicated precisely the opposite. And rather than comply with the requirement to return the unearned advance fees, Ponds refused to do so, despite an arbitral award requiring him to comply. Although the court did not reference the specific rules that were violated, it appears to have accepted the Board’s findings and conclusions that Ponds violated D.C. Rules 1.5(a) (unreasonable fee), 1.15(a) (reckless misappropriation/failure to maintain records), 1.15(e) (handling advances of unearned fees), and 1.16(d) (failure to protect client interests after termination), as well as Virginia Rules 1.15(b)(5) (misappropriation of client funds) and 1.15(c) (failure to maintain records).

Board Report and Orders (June 24, 2019)

Summary: The Board on Professional Responsibility recommended that the D.C. Court of Appeals suspend Ponds for nine months and that he be required to pay restitution to the client as a condition of reinstatement and complete a CLE course concerning In re Mance. Ponds took a flat fee from two clients at the start of his representation of each. Neither was put into a trust account. In each case, Ponds attempted to have his clients execute a waiver to avoid the obligation to have the funds held in his trust account. The waivers did not comply with Mance. These actions violated D.C. Rules 1.15(a) and (e) and Virginia Rule 1.15(b)(5) (negligent misappropriation); D.C. Rule 1.15(a) and Virginia Rule 1.15(c) (record keeping); D.C. Rule 1.16(d) (failure to return unearned fees); and D.C. Rule 1.5(a) (unreasonable fee). The Board Chair wrote a Separate Statement in Dissent wherein he joined the Board in its decision with one exception: Ponds violated Rule 1.5(a) when he charged and received a purported “non-refundable” flat fee, because doing so constrained his clients’ freedom to terminate his services. Three other Board members concurred in the Separate Statement.

Hearing Committee Report (August 14, 2018)

Summary: Not yet available.