Council member faces Bar Association disciplinary hearing

By Jean Reid Norman

Wednesday, Sept. 23, 2009 | 2:05 a.m.

Councilman Travis Chandler, an attorney by trade, has been suspended from the Nevada Bar Association for failure to pay his dues and faces an unrelated disciplinary hearing from a former client.

The suspension was effective Aug. 20 for Chandler’s failure to pay his 2009 bar association dues of $700, according to bar association spokesman Phil Patee.

In addition, Chandler faces a disciplinary hearing stemming from a complaint by a client alleging that Chandler allowed his patent application to lapse.

Eddie Lane complained to the bar that in 2005 he paid Chandler $4,500 to perform a patent search and file a patent application and trademark registration on his behalf, according to the complaint. Chandler wrote to Lane in February 2006 that the patent application had been filed, but two and a half years later, the application lapsed because of Chandler’s inaction, Lane alleged to the bar. Lane told bar investigators that Chandler was not returning his calls.

“Respondent failed to communicate with Lane and failed to perform the tasks for which he was retained,” the bar complaint alleges.

Lane, who went to the bar with his complaint last year, could not be reached for comment, and Chandler said he had not yet seen the complaint, which was filed Sept. 17, and declined to comment on it.

It will be up to a disciplinary panel to determine whether the allegations are true and whether any action against Chandler is warranted, Boyd School of Law ethics Professor Jeff Stempel said.

“The fact that it survived an initial screening means the bar has determined that it’s not an obviously frivolous claim, but the mere fact that it goes to the disciplinary panel does not mean there will be a finding,” Stempel said.

However, he said, if the panel finds that Chandler did drop the ball, “that would constitute a violation.”

How serious a violation would depend on how serious the panel decides the damage to Lane was, Stempel said. And the action against Chandler could vary, he said.

“It could range from a fee refund to the worth of the patent had it been successfully prosecuted,” Stempel said.

Chandler’s status as a city councilman should not have any bearing, Stempel said, unless those duties keep him too busy to complete the work he is hired to do.

“If a lawyer is too busy with the council to complete cases, he should hire help or drop public office,” Stempel said.

While Chandler would not comment on the complaint, he said the suspension from the bar over fees is not relevant to his business, which revolves around filing applications to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. He does not need a law license for that, he said.

Since becoming a lawyer in Nevada in 2004, Chandler said, he has been in a courtroom twice: Once before the state Supreme Court three years ago on behalf of a citizens petition that proposed selling the city’s land in the Eldorado Valley, and again last year on behalf of a client.

“I don’t want to take on cases other than patent applications,” Chandler said. “I had for a while entertained the idea to litigate patents in federal court, which would require a bar license. But as I looked into it, I don’t have the financial resources to sustain a patent case.

“I expect I’ll maintain my Nevada bar license, although frankly I’m not really using it,” he said.