The Institute’s Board of Directors has terminated the membership of Samuel Y. Harris in the Institute and in the College of Fellows for violating Rule 2.104 of the Institute’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (1997). In doing so, the Board concurred in an earlier decision by the Institute’s Executive Committee approving the decision and penalty imposed in this case by the National Ethics Council (“NEC” or “Council”). Section 8.142 of the Institute’s Bylaws and Chapter 8 of the Rules of the Board require that the Board review and concur in all terminations of membership for violations of the Code of Ethics.

The complainants filed the complaint in this case with the NEC in 2001. They alleged that Harris had violated two rules of the Code of Ethics (1997):

• Rule 2.101 states that “Members shall not, in the conduct of their professional practice, knowingly violate the law.”
• Rule 2.104 of the Code of Ethics states that “Members shall not engage in conduct involving fraud or wanton disregard of the rights of others.” The Commentary for Rule 2.104 provides that this rule addresses serious misconduct whether or not related to a Member’s professional practice.

Harris was invited to respond to the complainant’s allegations, but declined to submit a response. According to the facts alleged by the complainants and not disputed by Harris, the complainants and Harris became partners in an architecture firm in 1984. Harris was responsible for the financial affairs of the partnership. The complainants discovered in the fall of 1999 that, beginning in 1992, Harris had used monies from the partnership for his personal use. In late October or early November 1999, Harris admitted that he had taken monies belonging to the firm for his personal use, and thereafter resigned his partnership. Subsequently, the complainants filed a civil action against Harris with a state court, which issued a judgment in their favor and against Harris in the amount of $134,000.

The NEC hearing officer assigned to this case prepared a report and recommendation finding that this evidence was sufficient to establish a violation of Rule 2.104 which, as noted above, forbids Members to engage in conduct involving fraud or wanton disregard for the rights of others. The hearing officer also found that there was insufficient evidence to find a violation of Rule 2.101, which prohibits Members from knowingly violating the law in the conduct of their professional practice. In doing so, the hearing officer was guided by the Commentary for Rule 2.101, which states: “Allegations of violations of this rule must be based on an independent finding of a violation of the law by a court of competent jurisdiction or an administrative or regulatory body.” The court judgment mentioned above found civil liability but no violation of law, and therefore was insufficient to support a finding that Harris had violated Rule 2.101.

Harris appeared before the NEC when the Council considered the hearing officer’s report and recommendation in this case in December 2003. Afterwards, it held that Harris had violated Rule 2.104 in that, for a period of seven years, he wrongfully used substantial sums of partnership funds for his own personal benefit. It also found that any reasonable person would have known that this conduct, which occurred over a span of seven years, would cause the complainants substantial financial harm by denying them their full share of the revenue from the partnership.

In determining the penalty to be imposed in this case, the NEC noted Harris’ failure to file a response to the complaint when first given the opportunity to do so in February 2002, and either to mount a defense to the charges against him or to provide an explanation for his conduct until the last stage in the NEC process—consideration of the hearing officer’s report and recommendation by the Council. It also noted his admissions, during his appearance before the Council, that the complainants’ allegations were true and that in March 2002 he had pleaded guilty to the crime of theft, a felony in the third degree, in connection with his misuse of partnership funds. Finally, the NEC expressed concern that the Respondent had become a member of the College of Fellows after he had been convicted of a felony directly connected with his practice as an architect, and while this case was pending before the Council.

Although the NEC has generally reserved the penalty of termination for conduct potentially affecting the public health, safety, and welfare, it believed that the negative circumstances in this case were so compelling that the most severe penalty—termination of membership—should be imposed. The Executive Committee approved the decision of the National Ethics Council and the penalty imposed, and the Board has concurred in the decision of the Executive Committee.

Therefore, effective December 3, 2004, Samuel Y. Harris’ membership in the Institute has been terminated, and in accordance with Section 2.085 of the Institute’s Bylaw, he has lost all rights and privileges granted by law or the Bylaws, including the right to use the Institute’s name, initials, including “FAIA,” and symbols.

Copyright 2004 The American Institute of Architects. All rights reserved. Home Page