| Description: |
Thomas D. Lofton (WSBA No. 25893, admitted 1996) of Kirkland, Washington, has been ordered suspended for 60 days, commencing March 30, 1998, and ending May 29, 1998, by Order of the Supreme Court of Washington. The Supreme Court’s order of reciprocal discipline, pursuant to Rule for Lawyer Discipline (RLD) 12.6, is based on the Oregon Supreme Court’s August 12, 1997, Order approving a Stipulation for Discipline in which Lofton agreed to be suspended from the practice of law in Oregon for a period of 60 days, commencing September 1, 1997.
Between 1992 and 1995, Lofton was employed as an associate or corporate counsel by Secure Benefits, Inc. ("Benefits"), formerly known as Security Benefits Inc., a for-profit corporation in the business of selling estate planning documents, investment and insurance services, and related products. Benefits was owned by a nonlawyer. During the course of his employment, Lofton provided legal advice and trained nonlawyers who gathered personal and financial information from individuals and marketed Benefits’ estate planning documents and services, forwarding payments therefor to Benefits. He also provided legal services and advice to many of the individuals who purchased the documents and services from Benefits, and was compensated therefor by Benefits. In one situation, after he began to prepare estate planning documents for certain clients of Benefits, the clients changed their minds and asked Benefits for a refund. Lofton represented Benefits against those clients in trying to reach a settlement of the fee dispute.
The discipline was imposed for Lofton’s stipulated violations of various disciplinary rules of the Oregon Code of Professional Responsibility. He violated DR 3-101(A) and DR 3-102(A) by aiding nonlawyers in the unauthorized practice of law and sharing legal fees with nonlawyers; DR 5-101(A) by failing to satisfy the conflict of interest full disclosure requirements of DR 10-101(B); DR 5-105(E) by representing multiple current clients with actual or likely conflicts of interest; and DR-105(C) by representing a client against a former client in the same or significantly related matter in which he had represented the former client. These violations occurred while Lofton practiced in Oregon, and before he was licensed to practice law in Washington state.
On October 29, 1997, the Washington State Bar Association (the Association) provided the Washington Supreme Court with certified copies of the Oregon Supreme Court Order imposing discipline on Lofton and the Oregon Stipulation for Discipline, and asked the Court to issue an appropriate reciprocal discipline order pursuant to RLD 12.6. Thereafter, the issues were briefed. The Washington Supreme Court considered en banc the reciprocal discipline matter, denied Lofton’s motion for oral argument, and imposed the reciprocal discipline.
Respondent was represented by Kurt Bulmer of Seattle, Washington, and Peter Jarvis of Portland, Oregon. The Association was represented by Disciplinary Counsel Leslie Ching Allen.
|