| Description: |
Bernard A. Clark (WSBA No. 25031, admitted 1995, of Tacoma was disbarred effective May 14, 2003, by order of the Supreme Court following a hearing. This discipline was based on his conduct in 2001 and 2002 involving lack of diligence and communication in six client matters.
Matter 1: In early 1999, Mr. Clark agreed to represent a client in a personal injury matter. Mr. Clark filed the complaint, but then failed to timely exchange the required witness and exhibit lists. The court entered an order excluding the client’s witnesses and Mr. Clark filed a motion for reconsideration of this order. At the hearing, the court denied the request for reconsideration and dismissed the client’s complaint with prejudice. Mr. Clark did not tell the client about the dismissal. Mr. Clark filed an appeal of the court’s decision, but failed to timely file the brief. In November 2000, the court dismissed the appeal. In June 2001, the client retained substitute counsel and learned that her case had been dismissed.
Matter 2: In April 2000, Mr. Clark agreed to represent a client in an uncontested marital dissolution. Mr. Clark filed the petition in April 2000 and told the client the final hearing would be in June 2000, but did not set the case for hearing. The client was unable to contact Mr. Clark after June 2000, so he completed the case pro se in October 2001. Mr. Clark did not refund the client’s advance fees.
Matter 3: In February 2001, Mr. Clark agreed to represent a client in an employment discrimination suit filed by the client’s prior lawyer. Mr. Clark and the client agreed orally that after a $1000 fee, Mr. Clark would be paid on a contingent basis. In March 2001, Mr. Clark received notice of the defendant’s summary judgment motion, but did not file a response. The court granted the summary judgment motion and dismissed the client’s case with prejudice. The client learned of the dismissal in June 2001 when he personally checked his court file. Mr. Clark did not refund the client’s advance fee payment.
Matter 4: In August 2000, Mr. Clark agreed to represent a client in an employment matter. Mr. Clark sent a draft complaint to the client, which the client returned. Mr. Clark took no further action, but told the client that the complaint had been filed. The client was not able to contact Mr. Clark. Mr. Clark did not refund the client’s fees.
Matter 5: In January 2000, Mr. Clark agreed to represent a client in an employment matter. The client was not able to contact Mr. Clark until June 2000, when he told her that he had filed a complaint on her behalf and that a trial date was pending. After June 2000, the client was not able to contact Mr. Clark. In late 2001, the client retained new counsel and discovered that Mr. Clark had not filed a complaint. Mr. Clark did not refund the client’s fees. Mr. Clark did not cooperate with the disciplinary investigation of matters 1-5.
Mr. Clark’s conduct violated: RPCs 1.3 and 3.2, requiring lawyers to provide diligent representation and expedite litigation; 1.4, requiring lawyers to keep clients reasonably informed of the status of their matters and explain matters to the extent necessary for clients to make informed decisions; 1.5, requiring lawyers fees to be reasonable and contingent fee agreement to be in writing; 1.14(b)(3), requiring lawyers to keep complete records of client funds; and RLD 2.8, requiring lawyers to cooperate with disciplinary investigations.
Kevin Bank represented the Bar Association. Mr. Clark represented himself. Gayle T. McElroy was the Hearing Officer.
|