| Description: |
Timothy F. Perry (WSBA No. 15623, admitted 1986), of San Francisco, CA, was suspended for 23 months and for 30 days, effective June 1, 2004, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court imposing reciprocal discipline based on two orders for similar discipline from the state of California. This discipline was based on his lack of diligence in a litigation matter between 1995 and 1997, and willful failure to comply with a court order in 2002.
Matter 1: In July 1995, Mr. Perry agreed to represent a client in a claim against various security brokers. Mr. Perry filed the client's complaint and arbitration was scheduled for December 1996. Mr. Perry then notified the client that the arbitration had been continued, and indicated he would inform the client of the new date. Mr. Perry had no further contact with his client. The arbitration was continued twice due to Mr. Perry's failure to comply with discovery. In June 1997, opposing counsel scheduled a motion to dismiss based on Mr. Perry's repeated failure to comply with discovery deadlines. Mr. Perry did not notify his client of the discovery dispute or the arbitration date. Neither Mr. Perry nor his client appeared for the arbitration. The arbitrator dismissed the client's claims. The client learned of the dismissal during the disciplinary investigation.
Matter 2: On April 5, 2002, the Supreme Court of California ordered Mr. Perry to comply with California Rule of Court 955, the rule regarding duties upon suspension. On May 1, 2002, the State Bar of California sent Mr. Perry a copy of the order, but it was returned "moved, left no address." The court ordered Mr. Perry to comply with the Rule by June 15, 2002. Mr. Perry did not comply until August 30, 2002.
Mr. Perry's conduct violated California Rules of Professional Conduct 3-110(A), prohibiting lawyers from intentionally, recklessly, or repeatedly failing to perform legal services with competence; and 3-700(D)(2), requiring lawyers to promptly refund unearned advance fee payments; and California Business and Professions Code §§ 6068(m), requiring lawyers to promptly respond to client-status inquiries and keep clients reasonably informed of significant developments in their matters; 6103, prohibiting willful violation of court orders; and 6068(i), requiring lawyers to cooperate and participate in disciplinary investigations.
Felice Congalton represented the Bar Association. Mr. Perry represented himself. |