| Description: |
Dan Gilbreath (WSBA No. 33751, admitted 2003), of Yakima, was suspended for three years, effective June 14, 2011, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following approval of a stipulation. This discipline is based on conduct involving failure to act diligently, failure to communicate, failure to protect clients’ interests, failure to expedite litigation, engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, and violations of duties imposed by the rules. The suspension will be followed by two years’ probation.
Mr. Gilbreath was ordered suspended by the Washington State Supreme Court, effective June 17, 2008, for non-payment of licensing fees. On June 9, 2008, Mr. Gilbreath signed for and received a certified letter from the Association notifying him of his suspension’s effective date. The letter also reminded him of his obligations under ELC Title 14 to notify his clients, opposing counsel, and the court in any pending proceeding of his suspension and to file an affidavit with the Association demonstrating compliance with those requirements.
Between 2008 and 2010, Mr. Gilbreath engaged in the following conduct:
• Failed to promptly respond to discovery requests in two matters, and abandoned clients’ cases in four matters;
• Failed to pay court-ordered sanctions in two matters;
• Filed a motion for reconsideration and a motion for default in two matters after he was suspended from practicing law on June 17, 2008;
• Failed to respond to clients’ attempts to contact him;
• Failed to take reasonable steps to protect clients interests upon learning that he was suspended from practicing law; and
• Failed to notify clients, opposing counsel, or the court of his suspension, or to file an affidavit with the Bar Association dem-onstrating that he had complied with the notice requirements of ELC Title 14.
Mr. Gilbreath engaged in this conduct while suspended. In addition to engaging in the aforementioned conduct, between November 18, 2008, and October 1, 2010, Mr. Gilbreath failed to respond to grievances filed against him regarding his representation of clients in four matters.
Mr. Gilbreath’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 the client reasonably informed about the status of the matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information; RPC 1.16(d), requiring a lawyer, upon termination of representation, to take steps to the extent reasonably practicableto protect a client’s interests, such as 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 or expense that has not been earned or incurred; RPC 3.2, requiring a lawyer to make reasonable efforts to expedite litigation consistent with the interests of the client; RPC 5.8(a), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in the practice of law while on inactive status, or while suspended from the practice of law for any cause; 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.
Leslie C. Allen represented the Bar Association. Lloyd D. Coble represented Mr. Gilbreath. James M. Danielson was the hearing officer.
|