| Description: |
Robert Neil Dompier (WSBA No. 10871, admitted 1980), of Spokane, was disbarred, effective May 15, 2008, by order of the Washington State Supreme Court following approval of a stipulation. This discipline is based on conduct involving theft, dishonest conduct, violating a duty imposed by the Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct (ELCs), and acts of moral turpitude.
Mr. Dompier’s grandparents established funds during their lifetimes for the education of their great-grandchildren. Mr. Dompier’s father managed the funds until 1996. In 1996, Mr. Dompier assumed management of the funds and deposited them into individual accounts for his children and those of his three brothers. Individual trust accounts were established in the names of each child pursuant to the Washington Uniform Transfers to Minors Act, RCW 11.114.090 et seq. Mr. Dompier was custodian of each of the accounts and maintained complete authority over management of the accounts.
In 1999, Mr. Dompier began investing in real estate. He purchased various pieces of real property as investments owned in Mr. Dompier’s and his wife’s name. Mr. Dompier’s investment plan entailed his managing the properties for a fee. The income produced by the properties would cover the expenses associated with the properties. As the values of the properties increased, Mr. Dompier planned to sell the properties. Mr. Dompier’s plan did not work out as expected, and soon expenses began to exceed the income associated with the real estate properties. In 2000, Mr. Dompier began experiencing financial difficulties and began withdrawing funds to which he was not entitled from the custodial accounts and deposited the funds into his own personal accounts, using some of the funds for his own personal use, thereby unlawfully converting the funds. (Mr. Dompier specifically does not admit this conduct but does admit that there is a substantial likelihood the WSBA could prove it by a clear preponderance of the evidence.) By September 2003, all of the accounts were depleted of all funds and subsequently closed. Despite the use of the converted funds, Mr. Dompier continued to experience financial difficulties.
In March 2004, Mr. Dompier wrote a letter to his brothers, nieces, and nephews acknowledging that he had used the money in the custodial accounts. He apologized and indicated that he would pay the money back, which totaled approximately $47,731. In July 2004, Mr. Dompier and his wife filed personal bankruptcy. Mr. Dompier’s brothers were listed as creditors to whom Mr. Dompier owed money. These debts were for the funds Mr. Dompier took from the custodial accounts. As part of his personal bankruptcy, Mr. Dompier filed reaffirmation agreements with his brothers that reaffirmed the debt Mr. Dompier owed for the funds he withdrew from the accounts in a total amount of $48,331. In November 2004, a final decree was filed and Mr. Dompier’s bankruptcy case was closed. Mr. Dompier has not made any payments or reimbursed his brothers or his nieces and nephews for the funds he took from the custodial accounts.
In July 2006, the Association mailed the grievance to Mr. Dompier and requested that he submit a written response within two weeks. In August 2007, Mr. Dompier filed a response to the grievance stating that he had invested the funds in rental real estate on behalf of the beneficiaries, but that the real estate had been lost to foreclosure. Mr. Dompier’s response was not complete or truthful in that his real estate investments were made in his and his wife’s name, not in the name of the trust beneficiaries, and Mr. Dompier did not invest the funds withdrawn from the custodial accounts in rental real estate.
Mr. Dompier’s conduct violated RPC 8.4(b), prohibiting a lawyer from 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 a lawyer from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation; RPC 8.4(l), prohibiting a lawyer from violating a duty or sanction imposed by or under the Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct in connection with a disciplinary matter (here ELC 5.3(e)); and RPC 8.4(i), prohibiting a lawyer from committing any act involving moral turpitude, or corruption, or any other act which reflects disregard for the rule of law, whether the same be committed in the course of his or her conduct as a lawyer, or otherwise.
Debra J. Slater represented the Bar Association. Mr. Dompier represented himself. |