SCAD-12-0000726
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI’I
OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner,
vs.
LAWRENCE EDWIN CONDIT, Respondent.
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
(ODC 11-017-8941)
ORDER
(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)

Upon consideration of the August 22, 2012 petition from the Office of Disciplinary Counsel (ODC) seeking a notice and order for reciprocal discipline upon Respondent Lawrence Edwin Condit, Respondent Condit’s response, this court’s October 9, 2012 order directing the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai’i to seek the consent of both parties to the imposition of a private reprimand, ODC’s subsequent consent, the service of the October 9, 2012 order upon Respondent Condit, and his lack of response, this court finds that, on April 28, 2010, the Probable Cause Panelist of the State Bar of Arizona imposed upon Condit an informal reprimand, a two-year period of probation, costs, and further training, in light of Respondent Condit’s breach of client confidences, continuing representation of a client while engaged in litigation against that same client, and failure to timely return client files, in violation of Rules 1.6(a), 1.7(a) (2), and 1.16(d) of the Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct, and which, if committed in this jurisdiction, would constitute violations of Rules 1.6(a), 1.7(b), and 1.16(d) of the Hawai’i Rules of Professional Conduct (HRPC). In addition, this court finds Respondent Condit in violation of HRPC Rule 8.4(d) for his failure to cooperate during the course of a disciplinary proceeding for his failure to respond to this court’s October 9, 2012 order. In his earlier submission, Condit did not demonstrate any conditions set forth in Rule 2.15(c) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai’i (RSCH) exist that would counsel against the imposition of reciprocal discipline. Therefore, reciprocal discipline, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.15(c) and (d), being authorized and justified,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Respondent Lawrence Edwin Condit is publicly censured, pursuant to RSCH Rule 2.3(a) (3).
IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that Respondent Condit shall pay all costs of the proceedings, as approved upon a timely submission of a bill of costs, as prescribed by RSCH Rule 2.3(c).
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that, in light of the public
nature of the discipline imposed, the clerk shall re-classify the proceedings as public.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawai’i, January 14, 2013.

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald
/s/ Paula A. Nakayama
/s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.
/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna
/s/ Richard W. Pollack
(SA490924 2/2/13)~