| Description: |
Victoria N. Smith (WSBA No. 26569, 1996),
of Vashon, was disbarred, effective February
14, 2012, by order of the Washington State
Supreme Court, following approval of a stipulation.
This discipline is based on conduct
involving practicing law while suspended and
misrepresentation. Victoria N. Smith is to be
distinguished from Vicki L. Smith of Portland
and Vicki M. Smith of Portland.
Effective March 16, 2006, the Washington
State Supreme Court suspended Ms. Smith,
who is also known as Victoria N. Hayes,
for one year pursuant to a stipulation. The
stipulation required Ms. Smith to schedule
an independent alcohol evaluation within
60 days of signing the stipulation, comply
with any recommendations of the evaluating
agency, and pay costs and expenses to the Association.
These conditions were required to
be completed as a condition of her reinstatement.
Ms. Smith has never provided satisfactory
proof that she completed the required
alcohol evaluation, and was never reinstated
from that suspension. In 2010, Client hired Ms.
Smith and paid her $1,500 to represent him in
a parenting plan modification. Ms. Smith did
not tell Client that her license was suspended.
Ms. Smith sent a proposed parenting plan to
Client’s former wife together with a letter
bearing the letterhead “Victoria N. Hayes,
Attorney at Law.” The letter commented
about the proposed plan’s health insurance,
educational expenses, and other issues, and
it closed by requesting Client’s wife to contact
her to “discuss finalization and entry of
orders.” In October 2010, Ms. Smith wrote an
email to Client’s former wife regarding scheduling
a mediation, with the words “Victoria
Hayes, Attorney at Law” at the bottom of the
email. As of November 8, 2010, Ms. Smith had
a website, which described herself as “Victoria
N. Hayes, Attorney at Law.”
On November 10, 2010, Attorney B filed
a notice of appearance for Client’s former
wife. After conducting a routine inquiry, Attorney
B found Ms. Smith was not licensed
to practice law. Attorney B called Ms. Smith,
who provided her Bar number, but did not tell
Attorney B that her license was suspended.
Attorney B subsequently filed a grievance
with the Bar Association. In December 2010,
Ms. Smith responded to the grievance and
explained that she held herself out as an attorney
“in anticipation that her suspension
would be lifted,” and expressed remorse about
her actions. In November 2010, Ms. Smith
contacted Client and told him that she could
not represent him due to a “problem with
her license,” and refunded the entire $1,500.
Client’s parenting plan issues have been
resolved. Ms. Smith represents that she has
achieved stability in her personal life and has
not engaged in the practice of law since the
date she received the grievance, November
14, 2010.
Ms. Smith’s conduct violated RPC 1.4(a)
(5), requiring a lawyer to consult with the
client about any relevant limitation on the
lawyer’s conduct when the lawyer knows
that the client expects assistance not permitted
by the Rules of Professional Conduct
or other law; RPC 1.16(a)(1), prohibiting a
lawyer from representing a client where the
representation will result in a violation of the
Rules of Professional Conduct; 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; RPC 7.1, prohibiting a lawyer from
making a false or misleading communication
about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services; RPC
8.4(c), prohibiting a lawyer from engaging in
conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or
misrepresentation; 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.
Erica W. Temple represented the Bar Association.
Phillip H. Ginsberg represented Ms. Smith. |