| Description: |
Michael G. Sandona (WSBA No. 8983, admitted 1979), of King County, was ordered to receive two reprimands, effective November 29, 1999, following a stipulation approved by the Disciplinary Board. This discipline is based on his failure to diligently represent and adequately communicate with several clients during 1996 and 1997.
In 1996 and 1997, Mr. Sandona was employed by the Brouner and Associates law firm. The following clients retained Brouner and Associates (the firm) to represent them, and Mr. Sandona was assigned to their cases.
Matter 1: In May 1996, a client retained the firm to represent him in a residential placement and child support matter. On October 3, 1996, the court ruled on several issues, including residential placement. Mr. Sandona met with the client prior to filing the orders with the court. The client asked Mr. Sandona to file the orders so that the case could continue. Mr. Sandona did not file the orders and did not return his client's phone calls. In December 1996, the client retained another lawyer.
Matter 2: In April 1996, a client retained the firm to represent him in a dissolution action. Mr. Sandona was assigned to this case in late November 1996. On December 18, 1996, Mr. Sandona failed to appear at a temporary child support hearing; the court lowered the amount of child support the client received. The firm received notice of the hearing the day before the case was transferred to Mr. Sandona. Mr. Sandona indicated that the prior lawyer in his firm did not inform him of the hearing date. Also, the client was not informed of the hearing date. In December 1996 and January 1997, Mr. Sandona failed to answer telephone calls from his client. Also in January 1997, the CASA (court-appointed special advocate) investigator attempted to reach Mr. Sandona by phone to set up a settlement conference. Mr. Sandona did not return the investigator's calls. On January 30, 1997, Mr. Sandona withdrew from the case.
Matter 3: In August 1996, a client retained the firm to represent him in an action for modification of a parenting plan and child support. In October 1996, Mr. Sandona and opposing counsel reached an impasse in choosing a guardian ad litem. Although the client requested that the case move forward quickly, Mr. Sandona waited approximately nine weeks before asking the court to resolve this issue. In January 1997, Mr. Sandona failed to timely confirm a court hearing, causing a several-week delay in the case. In late 1996 and early 1997, the client was not able to reach Mr. Sandona by telephone. On March 10, 1997, Mr. Sandona withdrew from the case.
Matter 4: In November 1996, a client retained the firm to represent her in a dissolution and child residential placement matter. Mr. Sandona failed to timely respond to the dissolution petition. On December 11, 1996, Mr. Sandona failed to appear for a hearing on temporary orders. The court postponed the hearing until the next day. This hearing also involved a request for protection orders. Mr. Sandona submitted only his client's uncorroborated affidavit. Mr. Sandona withdrew from this representation on December 23, 1996.
Matter 5: In January 1997, a client retained the firm to represent her in a dissolution matter. Due to a miscommunication with another lawyer in the firm, Mr. Sandona failed to appear on February 14, 1997 for a hearing on a restraining order, but he did appear on February 21, 1997, the date he believed the hearing was scheduled. When he discovered his mistake, he took no corrective action. Mr. Sandona did not file an answer on behalf of his client until two weeks after a motion for default had been filed. In May 1997, the client retained new counsel.
Matter 6: In April 1997, a client retained the firm to represent him in a dissolution and residential placement case. On May 6, 1997, Mr. Sandona filed a summons and petition for dissolution for the client. On June 11, 1997, Mr. Sandona failed to appear at a hearing for a temporary parenting plan. The client did appear at the hearing and informed the court that he wished to represent himself.
Matter 7: In February 1997, a client retained the firm to represent her in a child support matter. Mr. Sandona filed a petition for child support modification based on a substantial change in childcare expenses. However, when the expected change in childcare expenses did not occur, Mr. Sandona agreed to a dismissal of the action. Mr. Sandona did not provide his client with a copy of the order of dismissal or communicate adequately with her about this order.
Mr. Sandona's conduct violated RPC 1.3, requiring lawyers to diligently represent their clients; and RPC 1.4, requiring lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed about the status of their cases and to promptly comply with reasonable requests for information.
Christine Gray represented the Bar Association. Mr. Sandona represented himself. |