Clayton lawyer admits making improper sexual suggestion to client

Melissa Meinzer//July 30, 2012//

Listen to this article

When a client whose ex-husband wasn’t paying child support came to Clayton attorney David B. Lacks for advice, Lacks proposed a solution, according documents recently opened to the public.

Lacks “made repeated unwanted sexually inappropriate comments to her and asked that she perform a sex act in exchange for money during a visit to his office” in May 2011, the client alleged in a complaint referenced in a legal document called an information from the Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel.

In Lacks’ document responding to the allegations, he admits only that “he made an improper suggestion of a sexual nature which was almost immediately apologized for.” He denies, in his response filed July 13, that the inappropriate remarks resulted in any conduct violation.

“There was what could be interpreted as an inappropriate comment made, which was immediately corrected,” said Lacks’ attorney Alan Mandel, speaking on his client’s behalf in a telephone interview with Missouri Lawyers Weekly. Mandel was responding to a reporter’s voice mail left for Lacks at his office. “The client continues to have his representation.”

According to the OCDC information document, dated June 29, the client, S.M., complained that upon arriving at Lacks’ office, she asked how Lacks was doing, and he “replied that he was ‘horny’.” When the client tried to ignore the statement, Lacks allegedly asked whether she heard his comment.

Lacks later added “that he always had the ‘hots’ for Ms. M. and would pay her $100” for each time she would perform a specific sexual act. He also inquired whether she liked anything “sexually kinky,” according to the document.

In Lacks’ response, he admits “that his conduct in making an inappropriate remark was wrong” but adds that his subsequent conduct was “cordial and that he represented to the best of his ability.” Additionally, “he is undergoing counseling so that such comments will be avoided in the future.”

The information document also says Lacks, who was licensed in 1966, was the subject of prior discipline, in 1995. In his response, Lacks says the prior admonition “is irrelevant and was the subject of a negotiated resolution and did not originate from the type of conduct alleged here.” The Office of Chief Disciplinary Counsel said that the 1995 matter is not public. Mandel, Lacks’ attorney, said it was not related to sexual misconduct.

The OCDC’s information document says Lacks is guilty of professional misconduct “in that his sexual interest in Ms. M. is a concurrent conflict” because there was a “significant risk” that his representation “would be materially limited by his own personal interests because had she accepted Respondent’s advances, Ms. M’s sexual behavior could be used against her in the divorce modification.” It notes that lawyers are prohibited from having sexual relations with a client unless the relationship existed before the representation, and that making inappropriate comments and offering to pay for a sex act “was conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.”

The OCDC seeks a decision finding Lacks guilty of professional misconduct and that he be disciplined in accordance with Rule 5. The next step is a hearing, which could result in dismissal of the charges, an admonition or other discipline.

Lebanon lawyer Eric Hutson admits to having sex with student on mock trial team

St. Peters attorney Frank Conard admits to conflict in Marion County foreclosure case

Colorado ‘settlement’ prompts professional negligence accusation against KC lawyer

Former KCMBA president James Wirken accused of receiving loans from clients

The list: 36 Missouri attorneys answer to allegations of wrongdoing