June 2006

Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection

by Robert Welden

The Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection Committee meets quarterly to review applications for gifts from the Fund. The Committee is authorized to make gifts of up to $25,000 to eligible applicants. On applications for more than $25,000, the Committee makes recommendations to the Board of Governors, who are the Fund's trustees. At their meeting on February 24, 2006, the Committee took the following actions:

Armando Cobos (WSBA No. 27006 — disbarred): The applicant paid Cobos $1,500 to file a petition for alien relative (I-130) and for adjustment to status (I-485); and $1,500 to file for cancellation of removal. Cobos never filed the petition for cancellation of removal and did not refund the fee. The Committee approved payment of $1,500 to the applicant.

J. Rodney DeGeorge (WSBA No. 22931 — disbarred): DeGeorge stipulated to disbarment based on a number of matters, including his conduct related to these applications. He stipulated to restitution and to repay the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection.

Applicant A: The applicant paid DeGeorge $1,000 to represent her fiancé who had been convicted on criminal charges. DeGeorge agreed to try to get the charge and sentence reduced; or get the client out on work release; or seek credit for time served prior to sentencing. DeGeorge gave the applicant a copy of a Notice of Appearance, but he never filed it and he did not prepare or file any motion or other documents. During a deposition conducted by the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, he produced a document purporting to be a letter to the client regarding his legal options. DeGeorge stipulated that he prepared that document for the purpose of the deposition. He stipulated to pay $1,000 restitution to the applicant, and the Committee approved payment in that amount.
Applicant B: The applicant paid DeGeorge $22,000 to represent her son on criminal charges. For over a year, DeGeorge misrepresented to the applicant that he had hired an investigator to work on her son's case. DeGeorge stipulated that he never hired an investigator in this case. When he received discovery documents, he gave copies to the applicant in violation of criminal rules. The prosecutor learned of this and brought a motion seeking sanctions against DeGeorge. At a hearing on the motion, DeGeorge falsely represented to the court that he had hired the applicant to do paralegal work, and falsely represented that he had a written employment contract with her. DeGeorge stipulated to pay $22,000 restitution, and the Committee approved payment in that amount.
Applicant C: The applicant paid DeGeorge $1,000 to represent her son on criminal charges. DeGeorge agreed to file a motion for a new trial. He gave the applicant a copy of a Notice of Appearance and a Motion for New Trial, and told her he had filed them. In fact, he had not. He took no further action on the case, and did not refund the fee. He stipulated to pay restitution of $1,000 to the applicant, and the Committee approved payment in that amount.

Terry O. Forbes (WSBA No. 5626 — disbarred: For background information regarding Forbes, see January 2006 Bar News, p. 34.) The applicant hired Forbes to probate the estate of her grandmother. There were 25 beneficiaries named in the will. Forbes prepared an accounting showing the amounts due to each. He failed to pay 13 beneficiaries. From the proceeds of the estate, $19,862.60 remains unaccounted for. The Committee approved payment of that amount.

Bruce E. Hawkins (WSBA No. 25414 — disbarred): Hawkins stipulated to disbarment based, in part, on his conduct in representing the applicants. Hawkins associated with several nonlawyers who maintained websites that promoted a program to reduce or eliminate consumer credit-card debt through private arbitrations based on the premise that national banks could not lawfully issue credit cards. Debtors throughout the United States made "applications" to the "program" through the websites. They paid fees and were referred to a private arbitration service organized to facilitate the "program." Hawkins stipulated that he knew that since 1996 the Department of the Treasury, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency had decided it is well established that national banks can issue credit cards. He stipulated that of the approximately 100 clients he represented, he knew of none who achieved the promised zero credit-card balance. He stipulated that debtors following his program achieved the goal of having accounts closed with a "paid as agreed" notation in about five percent of his cases, and that he would consider such cases "a mistake on the part of the bank." He also stipulated that many attorneys called him to "make huge accusations of fraud and illegality."

The applicants found one of the websites and paid $200 to "apply." They were referred to Hawkins. They paid him a fee of $5,722. Hawkins sent the applicants documents for the arbitrations, and he referred them to an arbitration service without disclosing that he had a financial interest in it. The applicants paid the arbitration service $139 for each arbitration and received five "arbitration awards." Hawkins then advised them to hire another lawyer to "confirm the awards." They did so, but when they filed the "awards," two of the banks filed oppositions and won. In the other two, after the banks communicated with them, the applicants stipulated to dismissal. The Committee approved payment of $6,417 to the applicants representing the $5,722 in fees paid to Hawkins plus the five payments of $139 paid to his arbitration service.

William R. Joice (WSBA No. 19944 — resigned in lieu of disbarment): Joice stipulated to a one-year suspension in connection with these applications. He was subsequently convicted by a jury of first-degree attempted murder in the shooting of another attorney. Following his conviction, he voluntarily resigned in lieu of disbarment.

Applicant A: The applicant paid Joice $600 for representation on a domestic-violence charge. Prior to his arrest, the only service Joice performed was to get a continuance of a hearing date. In his Stipulation to Discipline, Joice agreed to pay $600 restitution to the applicant and the Committee approved payment of that amount.
Applicant B: The applicant paid Joice $2,500 for representation on a DUI and related license-suspension proceeding. Prior to his arrest, the only service Joice performed was to get a continuance of a hearing date. In his Stipulation to Discipline, Joice agreed to pay $2,500 restitution to the applicant, and the Committee approved payment of that amount.

Donna J. Light (WSBA No. 22465 — disbarred: For background information regarding Light, see January 2006 Bar News, p. 36).

Applicant A: The applicant paid Light $1,000 for representation in a criminal case. Light told him she worked out of her home, but gave him no mailing address. When the applicant left messages on her phone, Light did not return his calls, and later her phone was disconnected. The applicant obtained a post-office-box address for her and he mailed her a letter discharging her and asking for a refund. It was returned because the post-office box was closed. He never heard from Light and received no refund. The hearing officer found that Light never intended to perform legal services for the applicant, and intended to obtain funds from him by fraud or deception. The hearing officer ordered restitution of $1,000, and the Committee approved payment of that amount.
Applicant B: The applicant prepared a pro se petition for dissolution and petition for temporary restraining order with the assistance of the courthouse facilitator. Light was in the room when they discussed looking for an attorney, and she offered to take the applicant's case. The applicant filed the petitions and then called Light. She paid fees totaling $2,050 to Light. Light never filed a notice of appearance. The applicant prepared declarations from her family and friends, which she gave to Light, who filed them. A hearing was set. When the applicant and Light went to court, the court commissioner said that Light could no longer represent her because she was suspended and that the applicant would need to find another attorney. The Committee approved payment of $2,050 to the applicant.

Carlos Valero (WSBA No. 29192 — disbarred): Valero represented the applicant in a dissolution-of-marriage proceeding. Subsequently, he paid Valero $2,400 for representation in child-support issues and to prepare a restraining order and a contempt motion against his wife. Valero took no action on these matters. The Committee approved payment of $2,400 to the applicant.

Fund Procedural Rule Amendments: The Committee voted to recommend to the Board of Governors that the Fund Procedural Rules be amended to state the current policy that, before an application will be considered, the applicant must also have filed a disciplinary grievance, unless the lawyer is disbarred or deceased, and also that if the lawyer's address of record is no longer current, notice of the application be sent to any other address on file with the WSBA.

22nd ABA National Forum on Client Protection: The Committee agreed to send one lawyer and one nonlawyer member to the ABA National Forum on Client Protection to be held in Vancouver, British Columbia, June 2-3, 2006.

Other Business: The Committee reviewed 10 additional applications that were denied for lack of evidence of dishonest conduct, or as fee disputes or claims for malpractice. Five applications were continued to seek further documentation.

Restitution: Before payment is made to an applicant, the applicant must sign a subrogation agreement with the Fund, and the Fund seeks restitution from the lawyers. Because in most cases those lawyers have no assets, the chief avenue of restitution is through court-ordered restitution in criminal cases. Prosecuting attorneys cooperate with the fund in getting the Fund listed in restitution orders. As of February 2006, eight lawyers were making regular restitution payments to the Fund.

The committee chair is Tacoma attorney Sarah Richardson. WSBA General Counsel Robert Welden is staff liaison to the committee.