SUPERIOR Court Judge Joseph N. Camacho has set an order to show cause hearing for Friday, Oct. 29, 2021 regarding a disciplinary matter involving attorney George Lloyd Hasselback.
On March 5, 2021, the disciplinary committee of the CNMI Bar Association opened an investigation into allegations of wrongdoing by Hasselback. Following the investigation, the committee transmitted to CNMI Supreme Court Chief Justice Alexandro Castro a recommendation for further action.
According to the committee’s investigation, on Feb. 5, 2021, while representing a client at a motion hearing in the case of Jiang Sheng Asset Management LLC vs Vincent Deleon Guerrero Torres and Wang Tao, Hasselback repeatedly stated to the Superior Court that he was unaware that a particular transcript had been completed.
Hasselback then requested a recess for time to review the transcript, which the court granted.
For his part, opposing counsel Victorino Torres filed a notice of duty of candor to the court, alleging that Hasselback, at the time that he made the statements, did, in fact, have knowledge that the transcript had been completed.
Attorney Torres’ notice suggested that Hasselback’s statement amounted to a violation of the ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct, but he did not request the Superior Court to impose sanctions.
Judge Joseph N. Camacho, who presided over the motion hearing in February, then submitted a letter to the CNMI Bar Association disciplinary committee notifying it of a potential violation.
Hasselback, in response to the notice, stated that he had received prior to the Feb. 5 hearing an email confirming the completion of the transcript but had inadvertently failed to read it.
The disciplinary committee met and appointed an investigator to determine the meaning of “transcript” as used in the allegation.
The investigator found that “transcript” meant “written transcript” and recommended that the disciplinary committee forward the matter to the chief justice for further action.
Under the NMI Rule of Attorney Discipline and Procedure, when the disciplinary committee recommends the chief justice to take further action, “the chief justice must appoint prosecuting counsel.”
But Rule 22 allows the Supreme Court “on its own or on a party’s motion…to expedite a decision or, for other good cause, suspend any provision of the…rules in a particular matter and order proceedings as it directs.”
On Oct. 13, 2021, Chief Justice Alexandro Castro, Justice John Manglona and Justice Perry Inos, invoked Rule 22 “in light of the investigator’s suggestion of leniency, the absence of a request for sanctions from opposing counsel, and to save judicial resources.”
The Supreme Court then remanded the matter to Judge Camacho for appropriate action.
For his part, Judge Camacho said based on the Supreme Court’s mandate, “it appears that there is no need for a prosecuting attorney as the justices indicated that the matter can be handled and expedited by the original judge.”
The judge said the deadline to file any written objection or explanation and/or brief is on Oct. 27, 2021.
He added that Hasselback may call witnesses. The lawyer, however, has already left the CNMI so he will be permitted to appear by videoconference at the hearing date, the judge added.
