| Description: |
Shane L. Kenison (WSBA No. 19613, admitted 1990), of Moses Lake, was suspended for 60 days, effective July 14, 2009, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following approval of a stipulation. This discipline is based on conduct involving failure to provide competent representation, failure to communicate, making a false statement of material fact to a third person, and dishonesty.
Mr. Kenison is a general practitioner with a practice in Moses Lake. On May 29, 2006, Mr. D was arrested and charged for driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI). Mr. D retained Mr. Kenison to represent him. Mr. D’s arrest for DUI precipitated a Department of Licensing (DOL) proceeding. After his arrest, Mr. D received notice from the DOL that they intended to suspend his license within 60 days. Mr. D also received notice from the DOL that he had a right to request an administrative hearing to contest his license suspension. Mr. D decided to contest the DOL license suspension, and completed and forwarded the required paperwork to request a hearing. Mr. D listed Mr. Kenison as his lawyer on the DOL paperwork and informed Mr. Kenison that he wanted to contest the proposed suspension.
On July 5, 2006, the DOL sent Mr. D a “Notice of Administrative Hearing by Telephone” (notice). The notice set the hearing for July 26, 2006. Mr. Kenison was copied on and received the notice. On July 19, 2006, Mr. D pleaded guilty to negligent driving in the first degree (with alcohol involved). On July 25, 2006, Mr. Kenison faxed a letter to the DOL hearing officer enclosing a copy of Mr. D’s plea agreement. Mr. Kenison’s letter to the DOL hearing officer contains a handwritten notation stating “wondering if the 26th hearing is still necessary.” Although the legality and circumstances of Mr. D’s arrest were relevant to the DOL proceeding, the fact of his conviction was not. On July 26, 2006, Mr. Kenison faxed a letter to the DOL hearing officer stating that Mr. D “withdraws the request for hearing.” As a result of this request, Mr. D’s DOL hearing was cancelled. It is disputed whether Mr. Kenison consulted with his client regarding withdrawing the request for the DOL hearing.
Mr. Kenison did not communicate with Mr. D to update him as to what had occurred on the DOL matter on July 26, 2006. Mr. D called Mr. Kenison several times after July 26, 2006, to obtain information as to what had occurred. Mr. Kenison did not return Mr. D’s telephone calls. On August 2, 2006, the DOL sent a letter to Mr. D stating that his license was suspended for 90 days, effective July 29, 2006. Mr. Kenison was copied on and received the August 2, 2006, letter. In late July or early August 2006, Mr. D hired a new attorney to represent him in the DOL proceeding. Shortly thereafter, the new attorney called Mr. Kenison to ascertain the status of the DOL proceeding. During this telephone conversation, Mr. Kenison failed to tell the new attorney that he had withdrawn Mr. D’s request for a DOL hearing. Instead, Mr. Kenison stated that the DOL hearing had been held on July 26, 2006, and that a transcript would eventually become available, which was false.
Mr. Kenison’s conduct violated former RPC 1.1, requiring a lawyer to provide competent representation to a client; former RPC 1.4, requiring a lawyer to keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter, promptly comply with reasonable requests for information, and explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation; former RPC 4.1(a), prohibiting a lawyer, in the course of representing a client, from knowingly making a false statement of material fact or law to a third person; and former RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
Kevin M. Bank represented the Bar Association. William F. Etter represented Mr. Kenison. |