| Description: |
Mark D. Bantz (WSBA No. 7790, admitted 1977), of Spokane, was suspended for six months following a stipulation approved by order of the Supreme Court dated September 1, 2000. The discipline is based upon his failure to diligently represent and communicate with a client in an immigration matter.
In 1995, the client’s previous lawyer was disbarred. A year later, the disbarred lawyer asked Mr. Bantz to represent the client. In August 1996, Mr. Bantz agreed to represent the client in an immigration matter. Mr. Bantz was not familiar with immigration law or procedures, but agreed to represent the client temporarily, until other counsel could be found. The disbarred lawyer wrote a memorandum to Mr. Bantz about what needed to be done on the client’s case.
On August 21, 1996, Mr. Bantz filed a notice of appearance with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) on his client’s behalf. On September 25, 1996, during a master calendar hearing, the immigration judge instructed Mr. Bantz to file an asylum application to be considered on December 11, 1996. Mr. Bantz contacted the client the morning of the hearing to remind him to attend. The client arrived at Mr. Bantz’s office 30 minutes prior to the hearing and found the doors locked. The client waited for two hours, then left a note for Mr. Bantz. Mr. Bantz did not contact the client.
Mr. Bantz did not appear at the hearing because he was scheduled to appear in a different court at the same time. He contacted the clerk, but she told him she had no authority to reschedule the hearing. Mr. Bantz did not file the asylum petition or attempt to reschedule the hearing. On February 26, 1997, the immigration judge denied the client’s application for asylum based upon abandonment. Mr. Bantz received a copy of the order, but did not file an appeal during the 30-day statutory deadline.
On July 1, 1997, the client was ordered deported to Iran, from where he had fled after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The client retained another lawyer to attempt to re-open his case based on incompetence and ineffective assistance of counsel concerning Mr. Bantz. Mr. Bantz did not respond to calls from the client’s new counsel. The client is time barred from obtaining political asylum, but the INS agreed to withhold his deportation.
By failing to file the client’s petition for asylum, attend the hearing or file the appeal, Mr. Bantz’s conduct violated RPC 1.3, requiring lawyers to diligently represent their clients. By failing to contact his client, Mr. Bantz’s conduct violated RPC 1.4, requiring lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters. By failing to pursue the asylum petition, Mr. Bantz’s conduct violated RPC 1.2(a), requiring lawyers to abide by their clients’ decisions regarding the objectives of the representation.
Jonathan Burke represented the Bar Association. Mr. Bantz represented himself.
|