/

:;fATE

WILEMON .

, "J

:j

No. 67-115063

§ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

s

§ TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS

s

§ 67TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

~ , 19~, came on to be heard

BAR OF TEXAS

7£-

On this ~ day of

the Petitioner's Motion for Default Judgment. The Petitioner appeared by and through its attorney of record, but Respondent, although having been duly and legally cited to appear and answer,

failed to appear or answer, and wholly made default. It appearing

to the Court, and the Court so finds that citation was served upon

the Respondent according to law, and that such citation together with the officer's return thereon has been returned to the Clerk

where it has remained on file for the time required by law.

The Court, based upon all the pleadings and papers on file in

this case and the law applicable thereto, is of the opinion and so finds that the material allegations of Petitioner's Disciplinary

petition, being uncontroverted, are true, and that the acts and conduct on the part of the Respondent regarding the Fikes complaint constitute a violation of Disciplinary Rules 1-102(A)(4) and l-102(A)(6). The Court further finds, as to each such violation, the Respondent guilty of professional misconduct as defined in Article X, Section 7 of the State Bar Rules.

Therefore, the Court concludes and is of the opinion and so

finds that the proper discipline of the Respondent for each occur-

rence of professional misconduct is disbarment.

EXHIBIT "A"

f 02655PAGE 017

It is, accordingly, ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the Respondent, JACK C. WILEr-tON, be and he is hereby, DISBARRED as an attorney at law in the State of Texas, and that he shall hereafter exercise none of the privileges and prerogatives of the office of an attorney at law.

It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Respondent, JACK C. WILEMON, is hereby permanently enjoined from practicing law in Texas, holding himself out as an attorney at law, performing any legal services for others, accepting any fee directly or indirectly for legal services, appearing as counselor in any representative capacity in any proceeding in any court in any Texas court or before any Texas administrative body, or holding himself out to others or using his name, in any manner, in conjunction with the words "attorney at law," "attorney," "counselor at law," or "lawyer."

It is further ORDERED that the Respondent immediately notify each of his current clients in writing of this disbarment. In addition to such notification, the Respondent is ORDERED to return all files, papers, monies and other property belonging to clients and former clients in the Respondent's possession to the respective clients or former clients or to another attorney at the client's or former client's request. Said Respondent is ordered to file with this Court within thirty (30) days of the date of this Judgment an affidavit stating that all current clients have been notified of the Respondent's disbarment, and that all files, papers, monies and other property belonging to all clients and former clients have been returned as ordered herein.

F 02655P1Gt 018

It is further ORDERED that the said JACK C. WILEMON immediately

surrender his Texas law license and permanent State Bar card to the

Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas. The Clerk of this Court shall mail a certified copy of this Judgment to the Respondent at his last

known address.

It is further ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall forward

a certified copy of the Disciplinary Petition on file herein, along with a copy of this Judgment to each the Clerk of the Supreme Court

of Texas, Supreme Court Building, Austin, Texas 78711, and to the General Counsel of the State Bar of Texas, P.O. Box 12487, Austin,

Texas 78711.

It is further ORDERED that all costs of court herein incurred

shall be taxed against the Respondent, JACK C. WILEMON, for which the Clerk may have his execution if they are not timely paid.

n

Signed this /(1 day of , 1988.

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE:

Russell A. Frlemel Assistant General Counsel State Bar of Texas

P. O. Box 12487, Austin, TX 78711 Bar Card No. 07473500

ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER

A CERTIFIED corr; . ATTEST :_ "-If)

19 (j('

~.

I'homaa P. Hughes Dist.dct CIElrk, 'L'arrant ..

COillrtY4

Deputy

F 02655PAGE 019

No. l; 'I -- I (SOlt; ~ - '? 8

THE STATE BAR OF TEXAS

S S s s S

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

v.

TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS _GijL JUDICIAL DISTRICT

JACK C. WILEMON

DISCIPLINARY PETITION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

Petitioner, the Grievance Committee for State Bar District Num-

ber 7-A, State Bar of Texas, complains of Respondent, JACK C. WILEMON, showing the Court:

I.

Petitioner brings this disciplinary action pursuant to the State

Bar Act, Tex. Gov't. Code S8l.00l, et. ~ (Supp. 1987), and the State Bar Rules. The acts and conduct of Respondent, as hereinafter described, constitute professional misconduct under the State Bar

Rules art. X, S7.

II.

Respondent is an attorney licensed to practice law in Texas and

a member of the State Bar of Texas. Respondent is a resident of

Tarrant County, Texas. An officer may serve citation on Respondent

at 3224 Tanglewood Trail, Fort Worth, Texas.

III.

On or about August 28, 1986, Respondent represented to Sid Fikes and Kathy Fikes, who were in partnership as Trinity Appraisal Company, that he was acquainted with a member of t~~"· Cooper fam.i),y who owned certain property next to the Marriott Hot~'i fi~oD. ~;~~ Ranger

-f " . :E

0:1: .. 7;J

Stadium in Arlington, Texas. He further rep~~~ted t~t the

;01>. ;e .-t" (

-(.. ... ~ c; ~-, - ',

~\:J _ br

n~ ~ ~rn E:,;: :I' ~O

:;- 'O-i

W ;-T1

(X) '-"':

--

Marriott Hotel Company wanted the property to build a restaurant, but that the Marriott Hotel Company had angered the Cooper family at some time in the past and the family would no longer deal with the company. He further represented that the Cooper family was agreeable to sell the property to Respondent and that the property could be re-sold to the Marriott Hotel Company at a significant profit.

He further represented to Sid and Kathy Fikes that the contract with the Cooper family would be structured such that even if the sale to

the Marriott Hotel Company at a substantial profit did not go through, there would be no loss of funds. Respondent represented that he needed $25,000.00 from Trinity Appraisal Company and that he would personally also put up $25,000.00 in escrow funds. Respondent further represented that the anticipated date of closing with Marriott Hotel Company would occur somewhere between October 1, 1986, and November 15, 1986.

On August 29, 1986, Respondent went to the Trinity Appraisal Company office and picked up a check for $25,000.00 from Sid Fikes. Later, on the same day, Respondent called Sid Fikes and indicated that additional escrow money was needed and asked if Sid Fikes could corne up with additional money. On the same day Sid and Kathy Fikes gave the Respondent an additional $8,000.00.

In October and November, 1986, Respondent gave Sid and Kathy Fikes various reasons for the delay of the sale of the property, including statements that the Marriott Hotel Company wanted to wait until the beginning of their fiscal year to close the transaction, which would delay the sale until November 30, 1986. Respondent also

represented to Sid Fikes during this period that the City of Arlington was considering widening the street on which the property fronts which would cause the lot not to be deep enough for the proposed restaurant, but that the president of Lincoln National Bank had agreed to sell some of the bank's land so that the deal with the Marriott Hotel Company could go forward.

In December, 1986, when Sid Fikes informed Respondent that their funds could not be tied up any longer, Respondent represented that he would sell their interest to a third party. No such sale ever occurred.

Respondent represented to Sid Fikes that all of the escrow money was being held in two title companies, Trinity-Western Title Company and Rattikin Title Company. Neither of the title companies have any record of.any such escrow funds.

Although Respondent represented that he was personally acquainted with the owner of the subject property, in May, 1987, Sid Fikes was informed by the record owner of the subject property that he had never heard of Respondent or spoken with a representative of Respondent with regard to the sale of the property.

Respondent has failed and refused to return the money given him by Sid Fikes.

IV.

The conduct of Respondent alleged in Paragraph III above constitutes violations of the following Disciplinary Rules: DR's 1-102(A)(4) and l-102(A)(6).

\

Petitioner prays for judgment that Respondent be disbarred,

suspended, or reprimanded as the facts shall warrant and that Petitioner have such other relief to which entitled, including costs of

court and attorney's fees.

Respectfully submitted,

Steven D. Peterson General Counsel

Russell A. Friemel Assistant General Counsel

Office of the General Counsel State Bar of Texas

P.O. Box 12487

Austin, Texas 78711

(512) 463-1381

~6.&-..~

Russell A. Frlernel

State Bar Card No. 07473500 ATTORNEYS FOR PETITIONER

A C:":R'fUIJ!j} COPY",

ATTEST :_ ,(-10

19~

- -

Thomas P. Hughes District Clerk, 'tarrant

caunl~

Deputy