| Description: |
Douglas Schafer (WSBA No. 8652, admitted 1978), of Tacoma, was suspended for six months, effective April 17, 2003, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following a hearing. Mr. Schafer has returned to active status. This discipline was based on his conduct during 1996 and 1998 disclosing a client’s secrets and confidences. For further information please see In re Schafer, 149 Wn.2d 148, 66 P.3d 1036 (2003).
In August 1992, Mr. Schafer agreed to form a corporation for a client. The purpose of the corporation was to purchase a bowling alley from an estate. During a conversation the client told Mr. Schafer that Mr. X., the personal representative of the estate had been “milking” the estate for four years. The client also told Mr. Schafer that Mr. X was giving the client a “good deal” on the bowling alley and that he would repay Mr. X. “down the road.”
Three years later, Mr. Schafer represented a client in a case before Mr. X, who had become a judge. In December 1995, Judge X ruled against Mr. Schafer’s client, imposing sanction. On that same day, Mr. Schafer started investigating Mr. X’s role in the H estate. On February 1, 1996, the client terminated Mr. Schafer’s representation and told Mr. Schafer he had “no authority to disclose any privileged information, relating to your prior representation of me.” The client retained new counsel who wrote to Mr. Schafer that any disclosure regarding Mr. X would be in violation of RPC 1.6.
During February 1996, Mr. Schafer prepared a document which revealed his conversations with his client. He met with and provided this document and others to the Pierce County Prosecutor’s Office, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Internal Revenue Service, The Seattle Times, The Seattle Post-Intelligencer, The News Tribune and two other local newspapers. In April 1996, Mr. Schafer attached documents disclosing his client’s statements to court pleadings without asking the court to protect their confidentiality.
In July 1999, Mr. X. was removed from judicial office. The Court found that Mr. Schafer could have made his allegations against Mr. X without revealing his client’s secrets and confidences.
Mr. Schafer’s conduct violated RPC 1.6(a), prohibiting lawyers from revealing a client’s secrets or confidences unless the client consents after consultation.
Christine Gray represented the Bar Association. Shawn Newman, Donald H. Mullins and Douglas Schafer represented Mr. Schafer. Lawrence R. Mills was the Hearing Officer.
|