| Description: |
Peter Moote (WSBA No. 6098, admitted 1975), of Freeland, resigned in lieu of disbarment, effective November 8, 2010. Mr. Moote affirmatively admitted that the WSBA could prove by a clear preponderance of the evidence the alleged violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct, and that proof of such violations would suffice to result in disbarment, but did not affirmatively admit the facts and misconduct herein. This discipline is based on conduct involving failure to act diligently, failure to communicate, conversion of client funds, filing false documents with the court, misrepresentations to a tribunal, the commission of criminal acts, and fraud. The Statement of Misconduct reads as follows:
Client A: From May 2004 until March 2010, Mr. Moote represented Client A in personal injury claims against a third-party insurer (TPI) and against Client A’s underinsured motorist coverage (UIM) carrier. The claims arose following an auto accident in May 2001. In August 2005, without her knowledge or permission, Mr. Moote settled Client A’s claim against TPI for $85,000 and dismissed her suit. He never informed Client A of the settlement or of his receipt of her settlement check and documents. On August 22, 2005, Mr. Moote received two settlement checks from TPI: one for $28,333.05, representing his fee, and one for $56,666.05, payable to Client A and representing her share of the settlement money. Mr. Moote forged Client A’s signature to her settlement check, deposited the check into an account other than his IOLTA account, and converted Client A’s money for his own use.
On July 28, 2005, Mr. Moote notified Client A’s UIM carrier that damages to Client A exceeded $85,000, and that Client A would pursue her claim against them. During the next five years Mr. Moote repeatedly misrepresented to Client A that he was in contact with her UIM carrier and attempting to schedule an arbitration to decide her claim when in fact he had no further contact with the UIM carrier about her claim.
In March 2010, knowing that no UIM arbitration had taken place, Mr. Moote misrepresented the status of the UIM claim to Client A and to the King County Superior Court, and attempted to defraud the UIM carrier. Mr. Moote fabricated and filed with the court three false UIM arbitration decisions and orders attached to three Petitions For Judicial Review seeking a determination of bad faith by the UIM carrier.
When Client A was injured in a second accident in April 2006, Mr. Moote told her that he would represent her in that matter. After he made preliminary contacts with the third-party insurer, however, Mr. Moote failed to pursue Client A’s claim and allowed the statute of limitations on her claim to expire, precluding Client A from receiving compensation for her injuries.
Client B: From February 2005 until April 2010, Mr. Moote represented Client B in her personal injury claim arising from an accident in November 2004 at a Country Club. In August 2009, at a mediation to resolve Client B’s case, the parties agreed to settle Client B’s claims for $100,000. On August 17, 2009, the Country Club’s attorneys finalized the settlement by mailing Mr. Moote a check for $100,000, settlement and release documents, and an order of dismissal of Client B’s suit. Mr. Moote failed to notify Client B of the receipt of the check and documents or that the case had been finally settled. Without Client B’s knowledge and permission, Mr. Moote deposited Client B’s settlement check into his IOLTA account, and, within days of its receipt, converted Client B’s share of the money to himself for his own use.
During fall and winter 2009, Mr. Moote did not return Client B’s numerous telephone messages or answer her letters requesting the status of the personal injury settlement and legal materials. He also failed to provide her with documents or to inform her about the status of her case. Client B’s suit was dismissed by the Superior Court on November 17, 2009, for lack of activity.
On November 2, 2009, and December 22, 2009, Mr. Moote sent Client B two checks totaling $15,000 that he claimed were partial payments to Client B of settlement funds owed to her. Mr. Moote misrepresented to Client B that he could not distribute the remainder of the settlement money owed to her until he had satisfied non-existent medical liens.
On February 18, 2010, knowing he had converted all of the settlement funds, Mr. Moote prepared and sent Client B a fraudulent IOLTA accounting sheet misrepresenting to her that almost $83,000 of Client B’s settlement funds remained in his IOLTA account. Mr. Moote owes Client B $49,000.
Mr. Moote’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, 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; RPC 1.15A(b), prohibiting a lawyer from using, converting, borrowing, or pledging client or third-person property for the lawyer’s own use; RPC 3.1, prohibiting a lawyer from bringing or defending a proceeding, or asserting or controverting an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous; RPC 3.3, prohibiting a lawyer from knowingly making a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal and from offering evidence that the lawyer knows to be false; RPC 8.4(b), prohibiting a lawyer from committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; and RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation.
Kathleen A. T. Dassel represented the Bar Association. Mr. Moote represented himself.
|