| Description: |
Mark Ture Elliott (WSBA No. 54007, admitted 2018) of Tacoma, WA, was disbarred, effective 5/14/2026, by order of the Washington Supreme Court. Claire Carden acted as disciplinary counsel. Mark Ture Elliott represented themselves. Randolph O Petgrave III was the hearing officer.
The lawyer’s conduct violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.1 (Competence), 1.2 (Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority Between Client and Lawy, 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4 (Communication), 1.5 (Fees), 1.16 (Declining or Terminating Representation), 3.2 (Expediting Litigation), 3.3 (Candor Toward the Tribunal), 8.4(c) (Dishonesty, Fraud, Deceit or Misrepresentation), 8.4(d) (Prejudicial to the Admin of Justice) and 8.4(l) (ELC violation).
The hearing officer recommended, and the court ordered, that Elliott be disbarred from the practice of law in Washington State.
Elliott was found to have violated the Rules of Professional Conduct by 1) failing to diligently represent a client, 2) failing to advise the client that the motion to renew a restraining order had been filed, 3) providing false information to the client, 4) failing to serve the prosecuting attorney a client’s motion for revision, 5) failing to respond to the client’s reasonable requests for information and/or failing to inform the client about the court’s order on reconsideration of the revision, 6) failing to timely file a notice of intent to withdraw in the client’s matter, 7) failing to respond to disciplinary counsel’s written requests for response to the client’s grievance, failing to produce the client file to ODC, and/or failing to appear as commanded at the depositions, 8) failing to communicate the settlement offer to a client, 9) failing to withdraw after being terminated, 10) failing to refund unearned fees to the client after they terminated Respondent’s representation, 11) failing to respond to disciplinary counsel’s written requests for response to the client’s grievance, 12) failing to properly draft or serve a motion for contempt and/or failing to properly draft a motion for temporary orders, 13) failing to respond to a client’s reasonable requests for information, 14) charging the client for work that was of no benefit to them and failing to refund the unearned portion of the fee, 15) failing to withdraw after being terminated, 16) failing to respond to disciplinary counsel’s written requests for a response to the client’s grievance, 17) failing to perform work for a client in a probate matter and failing to act with reasonable diligence on a guardianship matter, 18) failing to respond to the client’s reasonable requests for information, 19) charging the client $2,000 and performing little or no work on the guardianship matter and charging the client for legal work Respondent did not perform in the probate matter, 20) failing to refund unearned fees to the client after they terminated Respondent’s representation, 21) providing a false statement to the King County Superior Court, 22) failing to respond to disciplinary counsel’s written request for a response to the client’s grievance, 23) failing to act with reasonable diligence in representing a client, 24) failing to respond to the client’s reasonable requests for information, 25) charging the client $1,500 and performing little or no work of benefit to the client, 26) failing to refund any unearned to the client after they terminated Respondent’s representation, 27) failing to respond to disciplinary counsel’s written request for a response to the client’s grievance, 28) failing to serve ODC with an affidavit of compliance after Respondent’s license was interim suspended.
Decision documents: Hearing Officer’s Decision; Disciplinary Board Order Declining Sua Sponte Review and Adopting Hearing Officer’s Decision; and Washington Supreme Court Order.
|