| Description: |
G. Michael Sweet (WSBA No. 1808, admitted 1968), of Seattle, has been disbarred by order of the Supreme Court effective March 27, 2000, following a hearing. The discipline is based upon his misappropriation of client and law firm funds.
Matter 1: Mr. Sweet was a partner in a law firm from approximately January 1987 until April 1991. During that time, Mr. Sweet managed several real estate partnerships through which the firm members invested. Between March and December 1990, Mr. Sweet misappropriated approximately $55,866 from three of these partnerships. Mr. Sweet caused distributions to be made without the partnerships’ authorization. He also increased the amount due from the partners. In March or April of 1991, after questioning by his law partners, Mr. Sweet admitted taking $9,000. During this same period of time, Mr. Sweet misappropriated approximately $24,500 of firm money paid by clients for attorneys’ fees. In April 1991, Mr. Sweet repaid the firm $24,500.
Matter 2: In April 1991, Mr. Sweet transferred to inactive status. On May 18, 1992, he was suspended from practicing law in Washington for failure to pay his Bar Association licensing fee. In September 1993, a personal friend contacted Mr. Sweet about advice on settling his father’s estate. Mr. Sweet told the friend that he was retired from practicing law and recommended Ms. L to the friend. Mr. Sweet also told the friend that because Ms. L
was newly admitted to the Bar, Mr. Sweet would supervise her work. The friend retained Ms. L to handle the probate of his father’s estate. The friend was named personal representative. Mr. Sweet periodically consulted with the friend and gave legal advice about the estate.
In December 1993, Mr. Sweet asked the friend for $2,200 to pay an accountant to file income tax returns for the estate. Mr. Sweet also contacted the real estate broker and a mortgage company regarding the sale of the house that was part of the estate. When the house sold in July 1994, Mr. Sweet told Ms. L that he had the friend’s permission to invest the proceeds. Ms. L deposited the $46,166.76 check into her pooled IOLTA account and then paid the money out either to Mr. Sweet or third parties at Mr. Sweet’s direction. Mr. Sweet did not repay or invest the money. In October 1994, Mr. Sweet told the friend that he was taking the probate file from Ms. L to be sure she had done the work correctly. In November or December 1994, Mr. Sweet told the friend that he was afraid Ms. L had stolen the $47,000 she had put into her trust account. In late December 1994, Mr. Sweet admitted to the friend that he had talked Ms. L into giving him the house proceeds.
Matter 3: In 1993, a friend asked Mr. Sweet to prepare loan transaction documents. The friend planned to loan his son money to pay off the son’s home mortgage. On May 5, 1993, the friend gave Mr. Sweet a check for $48,000 to pay off the son’s mortgage. Mr. Sweet deposited this money into his personal bank account. Mr. Sweet paid the son’s monthly mortgage payments until August 1994. When the son learned that the mortgage had not been paid off, Mr. Sweet told him that there was a problem with the escrow company. Mr. Sweet did not pay off the mortgage. On December 22, 1993, Mr. Sweet went to the friend’s house and told him that someone had threatened to kill Mr. Sweet’s wife and two children. At Mr. Sweet’s request, the friend gave him $12,000. Mr. Sweet promised to repay the loan with interest. Mr. Sweet did not repay the loan until July 1994, when the friend threatened to tell Mr. Sweet’s wife about his comment regarding the death threats. There was never a death threat against Mr. Sweet’s family.
On February 14, 1997, Mr. Sweet pleaded guilty to two counts of theft in the first degree. Mr. Sweet received an exceptional sentence on April 11, 1997. The court also ordered restitution.
Mr. Sweet’s conduct violated RCW 9A.56.030; RPC 8.4(b), prohibiting committing a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects; RPC 8.4(c), prohibiting conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; RLD 1.1(l), subjecting lawyers to discipline for practicing law while on inactive status or while suspended from the practice of law for any cause; and RLD 1.1(p), subjecting lawyers to discipline for conduct demonstrating unfitness to practice law.
Jean McElroy represented the Bar Association. Mr. Sweet represented himself. The hearing officer was David T. Patterson.
|