| Description: |
Gregory S. Wilson (WSBA No. 12012, admitted 1981), of Tacoma, was suspended for 30 days following a stipulation by order of the Supreme Court dated May 5, 2000. The suspension began June 15, 2000, and Mr. Wilson has been returned to active status. The discipline is based upon his failure to diligently represent and communicate adequately and truthfully with a client.
On February 10, 1992, Ms. T retained Mr. Wilson to represent her in a personal injury claim. On December 7, 1992, Ms. T wrote Mr. Wilson a letter complaining about the lack of progress in her case and that he did not return her phone calls. On August 2, 1993, Ms. T wrote Mr. Wilson another letter asking him to provide an accounting of the work he had performed and to explain whether a lawsuit had been filed. Mr. Wilson met with her and promised to work on the case.
On August 31, 1993, Mr. Wilson filed a lawsuit against the driver of a car that hit Ms. T. Mr. Wilson’s nonlawyer assistant told Ms. T that the driver had been served with the lawsuit and that he had hired a lawyer in Seattle. A few days later, Mr. Wilson filed a confirmation of service indicating that the driver had not been served because he had moved to England and had not left an address. The weekend before the statute of limitations ran out, Mr. Wilson realized that the complaint had not been served. He dictated pleadings to serve the secretary of state, but these were not prepared because of computer problems in his office. Because Mr. Wilson served the complaint two days after the statute of limitations expired, the driver successfully moved to have the lawsuit dismissed.
Ms. T retained another lawyer to represent her. Mr. Wilson told the new lawyer that he was responsible for the loss of Ms. T’s case and that he wanted to settle her malpractice claim, but he did not have malpractice insurance. In June 1994, Mr. Wilson filed bankruptcy and did not list Ms. T as a creditor. In March 1999, Mr. Wilson agreed to pay Ms. T $125,000 over four years, and agreed that the debt would be nondischargeable. Mr. Wilson has made some payments to Ms. T.
Mr. Wilson’s conduct violated RPCs 1.3, requiring lawyers to diligently represent their clients; 1.4, requiring lawyers to keep their clients reasonably informed about the status of their matters; 8.4(c), prohibiting lawyers from engaging in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; 8.4(a), prohibiting violating the RPCs through the acts of another; 5.3, requiring lawyers to make reasonable efforts to ensure that nonlawyer assistants’ conduct is compatible with the RPCs; and 3.3, prohibiting a lawyer from making a false statement of material fact or law to a tribunal.
Anne Seidel represented the Bar Association. Brett A. Purtzer represented Mr. Wilson
|