September 2007
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.
Note: Approximately 30,000 persons are eligible to practice law in Washington state. Some of them share the same or similar names. Bar News strives to include a clarification whenever an attorney listed in the Disciplinary Notices has the same name as another WSBA member; however, all discipline reports should be read carefully for names, cities, and bar numbers.
Disbarred
James E. Freeley (WSBA No. 11251, admitted 1980), of Olympia, was disbarred effective May 3, 2007, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following a default hearing. This discipline was based on his conduct in 2004 in several matters involving termination of representation without notice.
In approximately October 2004, Mr. Freeley ceased practicing law without notice to clients, courts, or opposing counsel.
In January 2004, Mr. Freeley had appeared as counsel of record in two domestic-violence matters. Throughout 2004, Mr. Freeley failed to appear at multiple hearings. By October or November 2004, other lawyers appeared for the clients. By that time, the prosecutor could no longer locate the victim in the first matter and was unable to serve the victim in the second matter. The prosecutor was obliged to dismiss both cases.
In April 2002, Mr. Freeley was appointed "standby" counsel in an attempted murder case. In late 2004, Mr. Freeley began showing up late for court. In October 2004, he was removed as standby counsel after failing to appear for a pretrial hearing. It took several weeks for the Office of Assigned Counsel to find and appoint another standby counsel.
In April 2004, Mr. Freeley was hired to represent the defendant in a probation violation matter related to a narcotics offense. In late 2004, the defendant ceased being able to reach Mr. Freeley. Mr. Freeley missed several court appearances in the matter. The defendant eventually resolved the matter pro se.
As a result of Mr. Freeley's failure to appear in court on behalf of his clients, a grievance was filed with the Bar Association in November 2004. Mr. Freeley failed to respond to the Bar Association's requests for information during the disciplinary investigation.
Mr. Freeley's conduct violated RPC 1.3, requiring a lawyer to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; RPC 1.4, requiring a lawyer to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter, to promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, and to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation; former RPC 1.15, governing the circumstances in which a lawyer may withdraw from representation and imposing duties on termination of representation; RPC 8.4(d), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; and RPC 8.4(l), prohibiting a lawyer from violating a duty or sanction imposed by or under the Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct in connection with a disciplinary matter.
Joanne S. Abelson represented the Bar Association. Mr. Freeley did not appear either in person or through counsel. Nancy K. McCoid was the hearing officer.
Disbarred
Mark T. McCrumb (WSBA No. 23860, admitted 1994), of Auburn, was disbarred, effective February 6, 2007, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following a hearing. This discipline was based on his conduct involving submission of a false statement to a tribunal, providing false information during a disciplinary investigation, and trust account irregularities.
Between 2002 and 2004, Mr. McCrumb engaged in the following conduct, which established grounds for discipline:
• In a dissolution matter, Mr. McCrumb presented one or more written orders to a court containing significant discrepancies from the court's oral ruling.
• During the Bar Association's disciplinary investigation, Mr. McCrumb intentionally prepared a
letter with a false date in an attempt to establish compliance with RPC 1.8, provided false
information to a Bar Association investigator about the letter, and testified falsely in a deposition
regarding the circumstances of the letter's creation.
• As established by a Bar Association audit of his trust account addressing a period between
November 2002 and December 2003, Mr. McCrumb failed to maintain complete records
regarding client funds in his possession, failed to deposit client funds to his trust account,
disbursed funds of one client on behalf of another client without authorization, on one or more
occasions removed client funds from his trust account for his own benefit without establishing
entitlement to those funds, commingled his own funds with client funds in his trust account, and
failed to render appropriate accounts to his clients regarding funds held in his trust account.
Mr. McCrumb's conduct violated former RPC 1.14(a), requiring that all funds of clients paid to a lawyer or law firm be deposited into one or more identifiable interest-bearing trust accounts and that no funds belonging to the lawyer or law firm be deposited therein; former RPC 1.14(b)(3), requiring a lawyer to maintain complete records of all funds, securities, and other properties of a client coming into the possession of the lawyer and render appropriate accounts to his or her client regarding them; RPC 3.3(a), prohibiting a lawyer from knowingly making a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal; RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; RPC 8.4(d), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice; and RPC 8.4(l), prohibiting a lawyer from violating a duty or sanction imposed by or under the Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct in connection with a disciplinary matter.
Sachia Stonefeld Powell represented the Bar Association. Leland G. Ripley represented Mr. McCrumb. David W. Wiley was the hearing officer.
Disbarred
E. Armstrong Williams (WSBA No. 30361, admitted 2000), of Spokane, was disbarred, effective March 14, 2007, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following a default hearing. This discipline was based on his conduct between 2004 and 2005 in multiple matters involving failure to comply with duties on suspension, lack of diligence, failure to communicate with clients, failure to protect client interests on termination of representation, and noncooperation with disciplinary investigations.
In July 2004, Mr. Williams was suspended from practicing law for failure to pay license fees. He did not notify his clients, opposing counsel, or the courts of his suspension. In September 2004, Mr. Williams abandoned his law practice without making any arrangements for a lawyer to take over his active cases, which resulted in the following misconduct:
Matter 1: In June 2004, a client hired Mr. Williams to defend him against possession of marijuana charges. The client paid to Mr. Williams $1,500. At arraignment on June 14, the court set a pretrial hearing for July 2004. Neither the client nor Mr. Williams appeared at the hearing. Following the June 2004 arraignment, Mr. Williams did not respond to any of the client's letters or telephone messages. Mr. Williams did not return the client's file to him, do any further legal work, or refund any unearned fees.
Matter 2: In April 2004, Mr. Williams was hired by a client to assist her in a marriage dissolution proceeding. The client paid Mr. Williams $500 and gave him all of her original documents, including insurance papers, retirement papers, and an original stock certificate. The client did not keep copies of her documents. Mr. Williams reassured the client that he would send copies of the documents to her, which he did not do. Mr. Williams filed a notice of appearance and response to the petition on April 9. A status conference was held on May 27, and the next day, the court entered a case schedule with a November 2004 trial date. Mr. Williams took no further action in the case, did not respond to the client's many attempts to contact him, and did not arrange for substitution of counsel.
Matter 3: In January 2004, a client hired Mr. Williams to obtain an order for post-secondary education child support while the client's daughter (then 16 years old) attended college. Mr. Williams encouraged the client to seek increased child support for both her daughters. The client paid Mr. Williams $1,000. In February 2004, Mr. Williams filed a motion and order for show cause, which was opposed. The hearing was continued until May, at which time Mr. Williams filed a summons and petition for modification of support, which was opposed. Mr. Williams took no further action on behalf of his client, and he did not respond to any of the client's telephone calls, e-mails, or correspondence after August 2004.
Matter 4: In August 2003, a client hired Mr. Williams to handle problems with a parenting plan. The client gave Mr. Williams some original documents. At the time, Mr. Williams was an associate at a law firm. In October 2003, Mr. Williams left the law firm to form his own firm and took the client's file with him. Between August 2003 and June 2004, the client made installment payments on Mr. Williams's flat fee of $2,000. After June 2004, Mr. Williams did not respond to any of the client's telephone calls, e-mails, or correspondence. The client was unable to obtain any of his original documents or his client file from Mr. Williams.
In the above-described matters, Mr. Williams failed to cooperate with the Bar Association by not providing requested information and documents, by not responding to requests for responses to grievances, by not appearing at a scheduled deposition, and by not producing documents as required by subpoena.
Mr. Williams's conduct violated RPC 1.3, requiring a lawyer to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; RPC 1.4, requiring a lawyer to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter, to promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, and to explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation; RPC 1.5(a), requiring a lawyer's fee to be reasonable; former RPC 1.15(d), requiring a lawyer to take steps to the extent reasonably practicable to protect a client's interests upon termination of representation, including giving reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and property to which the client is entitled, and refunding any advance payment of fee that has not been earned; and RPC 8.4(l), prohibiting a lawyer from violating a duty or sanction imposed by or under the Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct in connection with a disciplinary matter [here, ELC 1.5, ELC 5.8(e) and (f), and ELC 14.1(c)].
Leslie C. Allen represented the Bar Association. Mr. Williams did not appear either in person or through counsel. John H. Loeffler was the hearing officer.
Non-Disciplinary Notice
Suspended Pending the Outcome of Disciplinary Proceedings
Robert M. Storwick (WSBA No. 17328, admitted 1987), of Mercer Island, was suspended pending the outcome of disciplinary proceedings, pursuant to ELC 7.2(a)(3), effective June 28, 2007, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court. This is not a disciplinary action.
