Camille R Buhman

I am submitting this formal complaint against my former attorney, Camille W. Buhman, of Buhman & Waldron, LLC, for multiple violations of the Utah Rules of Professional Conduct that occurred during and after her representation of me in my divorce case. Summary of Misconduct: 1. Refusal to Return My... Client File Ms. Buhman has refused, despite repeated requests, to release my complete client file and associated materials—including audio recordings, billing documentation, receipts, and communications—causing significant harm to my ability to proceed pro se. This violates Rule 1.16(d), which requires an attorney to protect a client’s interests and return all client property upon termination of representation. 2. Excessive and Unethical Billing In February 2025, I was issued two unexpected invoices totaling over $41,500 for a single month of work, including a $9,300 charge for just 10 days. These charges were far in excess of the $10,000 estimate she had recently provided to complete the remainder of my case. I had not authorized charges of this magnitude and was not informed in advance. This violates Rules 1.5 (Fees) and 8.4(c) (Misrepresentation). 3. Charging for Disputes Over Her Own Billing Mistakes I was assured early in the case that I would not be charged for time spent clarifying billing issues. Despite this, Ms. Buhman later billed me hundreds of dollars for communications solely related to her invoicing errors, some of which revealed thousands of dollars in overbilling. This is both dishonest and abusive. 4. Retaliatory Threats Upon Termination After I moved to dismiss Ms. Buhman, she responded with threats to place a lien on my home or garnish my wages. This occurred immediately after she had acknowledged my financial limitations and granted me a payment plan. These threats felt retaliatory and coercive, in violation of Rules 4.4 and 8.4(d). 5. Refusal to Communicate and Threatening to Withdraw Before Trial When I received the excessive invoices, I requested a meeting to understand the charges. Instead, Ms. Buhman refused to discuss them and threatened to withdraw just one day before trial, placing me under severe pressure to remain represented despite serious trust and billing concerns. This conduct undermines Rules 1.3 (Diligence) and 1.4 (Communication). 6. Lack of Billing Transparency and Potential Double Billing Ms. Buhman issued vague and unexplained "per-form" charges without identifying who performed the work or what the flat fee covered. Many invoices also appear to contain duplicative hourly charges for the same tasks already billed as flat fees.