June 2000

Disciplinary Notices

Irving Leroy Dane (WSBA No. 6587, admitted 1976), of Vancouver, has been disbarred by order of the Supreme Court effective March 27, 2000. This discipline is based on his committing a criminal act involving moral turpitude, failing to deal properly with client funds, and engaging in conduct involving dishonesty.

Matter 1: In 1991, Mr. Dane agreed to represent a client in a personal injury case against the other driver and the driver's insurance company. Mr. Dane accepted this case on a contingent fee basis, but did not provide a written fee agreement. In January, the client's own insurance company paid her $50,000 in under-insured motorist coverage. The client endorsed the check to Mr. Dane, who deposited it into his trust account on February 13, 1992. The client understood that the money would remain in Mr. Dane's trust account until the case against the driver and the insurance company was over. On April 15, 1992, Mr. Dane withdrew $10,000 of the client's funds from the trust account and deposited them into his business account. He used some of these funds to make the down payment on his home. On November 16, 1992, Mr. Dane withdrew an additional $15,000 of the client's money from the trust account. He used this money to make a payment on his house. The client settled her case on November 5, 1997 for $80,000. At this time, Mr. Dane told the client that her $50,000 was still deposited in his trust account and that he was negotiating with her medical providers to waive their liens. The client did not receive any of the $50,000 payment. On July 12, 1999, Mr. Dane pleaded guilty to a first-degree theft charge based on this matter.

Matter 2: In the fall of 1995, a client retained Mr. Dane to represent her son on second-degree murder charges. Mr. Dane required the mother to pay $15,000 in advance fees, plus $2,500 in costs. Mr. Dane did not provide the client a written fee agreement. The client believed she retained Mr. Dane on an hourly basis, but he believed that he was charging a set fee. Between November 27, 1995 and December 28, 1995, Mr. Dane withdrew $17,100 in attorney's fees on this matter — $2,100 more than was available.

Matter 3: Mr. Dane agreed to represent a client in a personal injury action against the estate of the intoxicated driver of a car that crossed the center line and seriously injured the client. Mr. Dane and the client agreed to a 33-1/3 percent contingent fee. The client received $2,276.89 from the Crime Victim Compensation Program. The Program also paid $2,479.13 of the client's medical bills. The Program had a statutory lien on any recovery by the client. The court ordered the estate to pay the client $22,650.92, plus interest. On February 6, 1991, Mr. Dane deposited the check from the estate into his trust account. He did not pay the Crime Victim Compensation Program's lien. Between April 19, 1991 and April 15, 1992, Mr. Dane withdrew $25,922.76 from his trust account, identified as this client's funds — approximately $3,000 more than was available. Mr. Dane did not pay any portion of the $22,000 to the client.

Mr. Dane's conduct violated RCW 9A.56.030; RPC 8.4(b), prohibiting committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; RPC 1.14, requiring lawyers to deposit client funds into a trust account, maintain complete records of all client funds in the lawyer's possession, and promptly pay to the client, upon request, funds which the client is entitled to receive; and RLD 1.1(a), subjecting a lawyer to disciplinary action for committing a crime involving moral turpitude.

Leslie Allen represented the Bar Association. Thomas Phelan represented Mr. Dane.

Michael B. Markham (WSBA No. 11388, admitted 1980), of Seattle, has been suspended for one year, following a hearing, by order of the Supreme Court dated February 29, 2000. The discipline is based upon his felony conviction of attempting to evade income taxes and subsequent probation violations.

On May 9, 1997, Mr. Markham pleaded guilty to one count of attempting to evade income taxes, a felony. On July 25, 1997, the Court sentenced Mr. Markham to three years' probation with conditions, including mandatory drug testing. On September 9, 1997, the probation officer alleged that Mr. Markham violated his probation by using heroin. The Court adopted an agreed probation modification requiring Mr. Markham to reside at a community corrections center for up to 120 days. On December 23, 1997, the probation officer alleged that Mr. Markham had again violated his probation by using heroin and being terminated by the community corrections center. The Court revoked Mr. Markham's probation and sentenced him to four months' incarceration followed by two years of supervised release. On May 29, 1998, Mr. Markham was placed on home confinement with electronic monitoring, after admitting that he traveled outside the district without approval of his probation officer. On August 19, 1998, Mr. Markham admitted to consuming heroin on six dates in June 1998, failing to submit to required drug testing in June 1998, and being arrested on July 9, 1998 for driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol and possessing narcotics and narcotic paraphernalia. As a result of these violations, the Court revoked Mr. Markham's supervised release and sentenced him to 12 months and one day of imprisonment at the SeaTac Federal Detention Center. Mr. Markham completed his sentence and has been released.

Mr. Markham's conduct violated RPC 8.4 (b), prohibiting committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; 8.4 (c), prohibiting engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; RLD 1.1(c), subjecting a lawyer to disciplinary sanctions for violating his or her duties as a lawyer; and RLD 1.1(p), subjecting a lawyer to disciplinary sanctions for conduct demonstrating unfitness to practice.

Leslie Allen represented the Bar Association. Kurt Bulmer represented Mr. Markham. The hearing officer was Kimberly Boyce.

Richard K. Clyne (WSBA No. 21556, admitted 1992), of Seattle, has been ordered censured pursuant to a Stipulation to Censure approved by the Disciplinary Board on March 15, 2000. This discipline is based on Mr. Clyne's failure to keep non-client funds separate from client funds in a lawyer trust account.

Mr. Clyne attended law school with Barbara Beatty. While in school, Mr. Clyne worked as a legal assistant for Ms. Beatty. After passing the bar exam, Mr. Clyne worked as an associate for Ms. Beatty. In the summer of 1992, Ms. Beatty began soliciting investors in a real estate project to build four single-family residences. Ms. Beatty had real estate experience and acted as the project developer. Mr. Clyne has some construction experience. Ms. Beatty asked Mr. Clyne to assist as site advisor. Some of the money from this investment project passed through the lawyer trust account that also contained client funds. Mr. Clyne suggested to Ms. Beatty that they open a separate account for the investment money, but no new account was ever opened. Both Ms. Beatty's and Mr. Clyne's signatures were required for trust account checks. Mr. Clyne wrote checks from the trust account for project expenses. In February 1999, Ms. Beatty was sentenced on one count of securities fraud for her role in this investment project. Mr. Clyne was not criminally charged.

Mr. Clyne's conduct violated RPC 1.14, requiring only client funds to be placed in a lawyer trust account.

Linda Eide represented the Bar Association. Mr. Clyne represented himself.

Censured

Jeffrey Thornton Haley (WSBA No. 9526, admitted 1979), of Bellevue, has been ordered censured pursuant to a Stipulation to Censure approved by the Disciplinary Board on January 12, 2000. This discipline is based on Mr. Haley's contacting a represented party.

Mr. Haley represented the plaintiff corporation in a trademark infringement suit in federal district court. During discovery, Mr. Haley determined that the president of the defendant corporation should be added to the lawsuit in his individual capacity. Mr. Haley wrote a letter to the defendant's lawyer asking if he would agree to amending the complaint. When Mr. Haley received no response from the defendant's lawyer, he contacted the president directly. Mr. Haley erroneously believed that the defendant corporation's lawyer did not represent the president individually. Mr. Haley did not take steps to determine whether the president was represented prior to contacting him directly.

Mr. Haley's conduct violated RPC 4.2, prohibiting a lawyer from communicating about the subject matter of a lawsuit with a person known to be represented by counsel.

Leslie Allen represented the Bar Association. Kurt Bulmer represented Mr. Haley.

Nondisciplinary
Actions

Mickie Jarvill (WSBA No. 14049, admitted 1984), of Stanwood, was ordered suspended from the practice of law pending the outcome of disciplinary proceedings by order of the Supreme Court entered April 6, 2000.

Interim suspension is pursuant to RLD Title 3 and is not a disciplinary sanction.

Back to table of contents >>