June 2003
Disciplinary Notices
These notices of imposition of disciplinary sanctions and actions are published pursuant to Rule 3.5(d) of the Washington State Supreme Court Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct, and pursuant to the February 18, 1995, policy statement of the WSBA Board of Governors.
For a complete copy of any disciplinary decision, call the Washington State Disciplinary Board at 206-733-5926, leaving the case name, and your name and address.
Disbarred
Robert C. Lyons (WSBA No. 22275, admitted 1992), of Spanaway, was disbarred, following two separate hearings, by order of the Supreme Court, effective November 19, 2002. This discipline is based on conflicts of interest, dishonesty and criminal conduct from 1994 through 2000.
Matter 1: In 1995, Mr. Lyons agreed to represent a client in a marital dissolution. During the first meeting, Mr. Lyons suggested that the client work for an escort service to earn extra money. Mr. Lyons called the client repeatedly for three months, asking if she would have an affair with him. The client began cooperating with the Tacoma Police Department by allowing a phone tap, and wearing a microphone and transmitter. During these conversations, Mr. Lyons asked the client to perform oral sex, and suggested that he "try her out" and then provide a reference to his friend at the escort service. Mr. Lyons fondled the client when she tried to leave his office. The conversation ended with Mr. Lyons paying the client for her agreement to have sex with him. When the media coverage of this matter aired, several other women reported similar conduct to the Tacoma Police Department.
Matter 2: In March 2000, Mr. Lyons agreed to represent Mr. and Ms. C in a personal-injury action based on a 1999 automobile accident. In December, Mr. Lyons told Mr. C that the insurance company was willing to pay only $1,100. The client agreed to this settlement amount, so long as he received the money before Christmas. On December 18, the insurance company issued a $2,250 settlement check to Mr. C and Mr. Lyons. Mr. Lyons deposited the check into his trust account without the client's signature. In March 2001, Mr. Lyons closed his office without disbursing any of the settlement funds to Mr. C. Mr. Lyons took no action on Ms. C's case. The driver's insurance company paid Mr. C his portion of the settlement, even though the company had paid this amount earlier to Mr. Lyons.
Matter 3: In January 2000, Mr. Lyons agreed to provide pro bono representation to clients of a women's shelter. In early December 2000, Mr. Lyons began representing a shelter client whose parental rights were apparently being terminated. Mr. Lyons told the client the representation would cost $100 per month. On December 27, during a meeting at the client's home, Mr. Lyons discussed his personal problems, pretended to be emotional, and asked the client to give him a hug. Mr. Lyons then convinced the client to move to her bedroom, undressed her, and had sexual intercourse with her, despite her objections. The client was intimidated by Mr. Lyons's large stature and manipulated by his promise to get her children back.
On December 31, Mr. Lyons arrived at the client's house just before midnight. Mr. Lyons demanded to have sex with the client, she refused, and he left. Mr. Lyons called the client several times, asking her to say sexual things over the telephone. On February 5, 2001, the shelter asked Mr. Lyons to cease all contact with its clients. Mr. Lyons falsely told the shelter director that the client had been the aggressor. Mr. Lyons's conduct caused the client to relapse in her treatment, leading the court to place her children with a relative.
Matter 4: In summer 1999, Mr. Lyons agreed to represent the mother in a child-custody matter. Mr. Lyons suggested that the client provide sexual favors as payment for his legal services. The client initially said no, but agreed as she became more desperate for legal assistance. This arrangement continued for months. When the client refused to provide sexual favors, Mr. Lyons offered to pay her money for sex. In July 2000, Mr. Lyons told the client that he loved her and was going to leave his wife and family. The client did not want to develop a relationship with Mr. Lyons and was eventually able to terminate the sexual relationship. In November 2000, while trying to remove a ring from the client's finger, Mr. Lyons picked her up and threw her on the ground. Mr. Lyons was charged with fourth-degree assault. Despite a no-contact order, Mr. Lyons entered the client's house while she was sleeping, attempted to have anal sex with her, and, in the process, choked her unconscious and pinned her down. The client was eventually able to contact the
police.
Matter 5: In 1999, a client retained Mr. Lyons to collect a judgment she was awarded in a defamation case and to represent her in a lawsuit filed against her. When the plaintiff did not show up for trial, Mr. Lyons prepared one form dismissing the lawsuit. In October 2000, the client paid Mr. Lyons $2,000 to represent her in another lawsuit filed by a lawyer to collect his fees. Mr. Lyons told the client that the arbitration was continued, so she did not attend. The arbitration was not continued, and the arbitrator entered a $35,000 default judgment against the client. Mr. Lyons told the client he would deposit the client's $35,000 in his trust account to prevent the lawyer from collecting, convert it to his own use, and the client could recover the money from the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection. Mr. Lyons also borrowed money from the client and used her credit card for over $3,000 more than their agreement.
Matter 6: In early 2000, Mr. Lyons agreed to represent the husband in a marriage-dissolution action. In April 2000, the parties reached an agreement including a $3,000 payment from the wife to the husband. In February 2001, the wife's lawyer sent the $3,000 to Mr. Lyons. Mr. Lyons deposited the check, but did not notify his client. In April 2001, the client filed his own motion for a contempt judgment against the wife for failure to pay the $3,000. Prior to the hearing, the client stopped by Mr. Lyons's office and learned that Mr. Lyons was no longer there. The client learned in court, for the first time, that the wife had made the payment. The back of the check contains two signatures, but neither is the client's. The client never received his funds.
Mr. Lyons's conduct violated RPCs 8.4(a), prohibiting attempting to violate the RPCs through the acts of another; 8.4(b), prohibiting committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on a lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; 8.4(c), prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; 8.4(d), prohibiting conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; 1.7(b), prohibiting representation of a client if the representation may be materially limited by the lawyer's own interests; 1.8(k), prohibiting sexual relations with a current client, unless a consensual relationship existed at the time the representation began; 1.14, requiring lawyers to promptly notify a client of the receipt of funds and pay the funds to the client when requested; 2.1, requiring lawyers to exercise independent judgment; 1.8, prohibiting lawyers from entering business transactions with clients, unless the terms are fair and reasonable, the client consents, and the client has a reasonable opportunity to seek independent legal advice; 1.4, requiring lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed of the status of their matters; and 1.3, requiring lawyers to act with reasonable diligence and promptness.
James Trujillo represented the Bar Association in the first hearing and Sachia Stonefeld Powell in the second. Kurt Bulmer represented Mr. Lyons in a portion of the first matter and Mr. Lyons represented himself in the second. The hearing officer in the first hearing was Carolyn Lake and, in the second, Thomas Jerome Greenan.
Suspended
John C. Caldwell (WSBA No. 28831, admitted 1999), of Mill Creek, was suspended for 90 days, following a stipulation, by order of the Supreme Court, effective May 30, 2002. This discipline is based on his failure to properly handle client funds in 2000.
Matter 1: In April 2000, Mr. Caldwell agreed to represent a client in a criminal appeal. The client's sister paid Mr. Caldwell $10,000, which Mr. Caldwell deposited into his personal account. Mr. Caldwell did not prepare a written fee agreement. Mr. Caldwell filed a notice of appeal and paid the $250 filing fee. Mr. Caldwell met with the client twice at the correctional facility. In August, the client's new lawyer sent Mr. Caldwell a notice of substitution. The client's sister requested that Mr. Caldwell refund her fees. Mr. Caldwell stipulated that he had earned $1,000, but did not have the money to return the sister's $9,000.
Matter 2: In late 1999 or early 2000, Mr. Caldwell advised a client about a business purchase. During this meeting the client gave Mr. Caldwell original documents, including the original purchase and sale agreement. In June 2000, Mr. Caldwell left his law firm, took the client's file with him, and stored it in a drawer in his residence. On July 15, the client asked Mr. Caldwell to return his file. Mr. Caldwell was not able to locate the file and has not returned the client's original documents.
Mr. Caldwell's conduct violated RPCs 1.14(b)(4), requiring lawyers to promptly deliver client funds upon request; 1.14(a), requiring lawyers to deposit client funds into a trust account; and 1.15(d), requiring lawyers to take reasonable steps to protect clients' interests upon withdrawal from representation.
Kevin Bank represented the Bar Association. Mr. Caldwell represented himself.
Suspended
Philip S. Morgan IV (WSBA No. 21607, admitted 1992), of Seattle, was suspended for two years, following a hearing, by order of the Supreme Court, effective February 5, 2003. This discipline is based on his failure to diligently represent and adequately communicate with five clients during 1999.
Matter 1: In February 1999, Mr. Morgan agreed to represent a client in a Labor and Industries (L&I) proceeding. In April 1999, Mr. Morgan filed two appeals for the client. In September 1999, Mr. Morgan missed the required scheduling conference and then failed to appear for the hearing. He called from a roadside phone the day of the hearing and requested a continuance. The Board of Labor Appeals denied his continuance and dismissed the client's appeals.
Matter 2: In February 1999, Mr. Morgan agreed to represent a client in a L&I appeal. In July 1999, the employer's lawyer sent Mr. Morgan a proposed stipulation. Mr. Morgan did not respond to opposing counsel. Mr. Morgan also failed to appear at the stipulation conference, even though subpoenaed by the administrative law judge.
Matter 3: In March 1999, Mr. Morgan assumed responsibility for a client's third-party L&I claim. Mr. Morgan filed the client's lawsuit the day before the statute of limitations expired, but did not perfect service within the required 90 days. The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment based on expiration of the statute of limitations. Mr. Morgan failed to appear at the hearing. The court dismissed the client's claim.
Matter 4: In May 1999, Mr. Morgan agreed to represent a client in a third-party L&I claim. Although he told the client that everything was under control, Mr. Morgan failed to file a complaint prior to expiration of the statute of limitations. Mr. Morgan did not respond to the client's phone calls.
Matter 5: In February 1999, Mr. Morgan agreed to represent a client in an L&I appeal. Mr. Morgan failed to act on the client's appeal, and the department closed the file in April 1999. Mr. Morgan did not send the order to the client or file an appeal within the required 60 days. When the client learned of the dismissal, he filed an appeal, but it was dismissed as untimely.
Mr. Morgan's conduct violated RPCs 1.3, requiring lawyers to diligently represent their clients; 1.4, requiring lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed of the status of their matters; and 3.4(c), prohibiting lawyers from knowingly disobeying an obligation under the rules of a tribunal.
William R. Squires III and Anthony Butler represented the Bar Association. Mr. Morgan represented himself. The hearing officer was Waldo F. Stone.
Suspended
Santiago Juarez (WSBA No. 5686, admitted 1974), of Espanola, NM, was suspended for 18 months, following a stipulation, by order of the Supreme Court, effective May 31, 2002. This discipline is based on his failure to comply with trust-account rules, promptly deliver client funds, and cooperate with the discipline investigation in 2000 and 2001.
In 1999, Mr. Juarez assisted another lawyer in representing a client charged with distribution of a controlled substance. The client paid Mr. Juarez a $6,000 fee. There was no written fee agreement. Mr. Juarez stated that the fee was nonrefundable, which the client denied. Mr. Juarez failed to place the funds in a trust account. Mr. Juarez did not maintain complete records of the client's funds. Mr. Juarez told lead counsel he would travel to Spokane to meet counsel and the client, but he failed to attend the meeting. Mr. Juarez did not file any pleadings, go to court, send correspondence, or speak with witnesses. He did review police reports and had telephone conversations with lead counsel and the client.
In late 2000, the client terminated Mr. Juarez's services, requesting a refund of $5,000 and return of her file. In February 2001, Mr. Juarez promised to send the client $4,000. Mr. Juarez did not send the client the refund until after disciplinary counsel had served him with a subpoena duces tecum for failure to cooperate with the disciplinary investigation.
Mr. Juarez's conduct violated RPCs 1.14(a) and (b), requiring lawyers to place client funds in a trust account and to keep complete records of these transactions; 1.14(b)(4), requiring lawyers to promptly deliver client funds upon request; 1.15(d), requiring lawyers to take reasonable steps to protect a client's interests upon withdrawal; 1.4, requiring lawyers to keep clients informed about the status of their matters; and RLD 2.8, requiring lawyers to promptly comply with requests for information during disciplinary investigations.
Anne Seidel represented the Bar Association. Mr. Juarez represented himself.
Suspended
Paul H. King (WSBA No. 7370, admitted 1977), of Seattle, was suspended for six months, following a hearing, by order of the Supreme Court, effective April 25, 2002. This discipline is based on his lack of diligence in one matter and misrepresentation in another in 1995.
Matter 1: Mr. King, or his office, accepted responsibility for filing a client's small-claims court notice of appeal. The client's notice was not timely filed and he lost the right to appeal.
Matter 2: In November 1995, Mr. King contacted the escrow company holding lien funds that had been assigned to his wife, Rita King. The funds were disputed fees from Mr. G, a prior client's dissolution action. Mr. King asked the escrow agent to release the funds to him, even though the escrow instructions indicated the funds had been assigned to Rita King. When the escrow agent refused, Mr. King filed a motion in Mr. G's divorce action, asking the court to disburse the escrow funds to Mr. King to hold "in trust" for Rita King. Mr. King stated in the motion that he continued to represent Mr. G.
Mr. King's representation of Mr. G had ended in 1993, and the client disputed Mr. King's right to the lien funds. Mr. King did not give notice of his motion to the parties involved in the earlier dissolution. Mr. King also did not disclose to the court that his divorce from Rita King was then pending in Snohomish County Superior Court. Mr. King presented this motion to conceal the existence of these funds from Rita King and the court presiding over his dissolution.
Mr. King's conduct violated RPCs 1.3, requiring lawyers to diligently represent their clients; 3.3, prohibiting lawyers from making false statements of fact to the tribunal; 1.15, requiring lawyers to take steps to protect a client's interests, upon withdrawal; 3.5(b), prohibiting ex parte communication with the tribunal, except as permitted by law; and 8.4(c), prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.
Leslie Allen represented the Bar Association. Peter Cogan represented Mr. King. The hearing officer was Charles T. Conrad.
Suspended
Steven J. Thomas (WSBA No. 20076, admitted 1990), of Enumclaw, was suspended for 90 days, following a hearing, by order of the Supreme Court, effective February 10, 2003. This discipline is based on his continuing to practice law during an administrative license suspension during 1999.
In May 1998, the WSBA notified Mr. Thomas that it had not received his required mandatory continuing legal education (MCLE) report for 1995 through 1997, which was due December 31, 1997. On January 6, 1999, after granting two extensions, the WSBA notified Mr. Thomas that it had not received his MCLE report or the $450 late-filing fee. The letter also indicated that if Mr. Thomas did not comply by January 18, 1999, he would be considered for suspension. The Supreme Court suspended Mr. Thomas's license on February 11, 1999. On March 25, Mr. Thomas spoke with a WSBA employee, telling her he knew about his suspension, but he was not going to stop practicing. The Supreme Court reinstated Mr. Thomas's license on May 5, 1999.
During his suspension, Mr. Thomas continued to practice law, representing clients in Washington state courts.
Mr. Thomas's conduct violated RPCs 5.5(a), prohibiting lawyers from practicing in jurisdictions in which doing so violates the regulations of the legal profession; 1.15, requiring lawyers to withdraw from representation when to continue would violate the RPCs; 8.4(d), prohibiting lawyers from engaging in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice; and RLD 8.2, prohibiting suspended lawyers from continuing to practice law.
Timothy Whitters and Joanne Abelson represented the Bar Association. David Butler represented Mr. Thomas through a portion of the proceedings. Mr. Thomas represented himself through a portion of the proceedings. The hearing officer was J.C. Becker.
Suspended
Thomas Westbrook (WSBA No. 4986, admitted 1973), of Littlerock, was suspended for two years by order of the Supreme Court approving a stipulation, effective November 5, 2001. This discipline is based on his false statement to a bank in 1991. Mr. Westbrook will be eligible for reinstatement on November 5, 2003.
In late January 1991, Mr. Westbrook submitted a false statement of fact to a bank to support a request for a line of credit for his company. Mr. Westbrook submitted a borrowing certificate stating that his company had receivables of $846.00 and $624.51, and an inventory of $979,764.92, knowing that these figures were substantially inflated. In 1998, Mr. Westbrook pled guilty to one count of false statement in connection with a federally insured loan, a felony.
Mr. Westbrook's conduct violated RPCs 8.4(b), prohibiting committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on a lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; 8.4(c), prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; and RLD 1.1(c), requiring lawyers to abide by the laws of the United States as required by the oath of duties as a lawyer.
John Wolfe and Becky Neal represented the Bar Association. Mr. Westbrook represented himself.
Reprimand
Thomas P. Robinson (WSBA No. 11269, admitted 1980), of Spokane, received a reprimand on May 4, 2001, based on a stipulation approved by the Disciplinary Board. This discipline is based on his failure to avoid a conflict of interest in 1995. (Mr. Robinson is to be distinguished from Thomas S. Robinson of Seattle.)
In 1995, Mr. Robinson represented Ms. S in a guardianship petition for her father's estate. Ms. S was appointed guardian and then, in October 1995, her father died. Ms. S was appointed personal representative of her father's estate, and retained Mr. Robinson to represent the estate and complete the probate. The estate's main asset was a bank account with a $194,000 balance. Ms. S told Mr. Robinson that she and her father, prior to his death, had signed documents converting the bank account to a joint account with right of survivorship. The other heirs believed the bank account to be an estate asset. Mr. Robinson also learned that the bank refused to recognize the signature card purporting to create the joint account. Mr. Robinson agreed to advocate Ms. S's position without advising Ms. S or the other heirs about the conflict, or obtaining their written consent to continue the representations. Mr. Robinson withdrew from the representation in 1996. In 1997, the court found that the account was an estate asset.
Mr. Robinson's conduct violated RPC 1.7(a), prohibiting representing a client if the representation will be directly adverse to another client, unless the lawyer believes the representation will not adversely affect the relationship with the other client and both clients consent in writing after full disclosure and consultation.
Leslie Allen represented the Bar Association. J. Donald Curran represented Mr. Robinson.
Back to table of contents >>
