| Description: |
Seattle lawyer Jeffery Alan Hess (WSBA No. 7072, admitted 1976) has been ordered suspended for 60 days pursuant to a stipulation for discipline, approved by the Supreme Court on December 4, 1997, with the suspension to be effective starting December 11, 1997. The discipline is based upon his allowing a default judgment to be taken against his clients, failing to make sure his clients were adequately informed about their matter, failing to move to set aside the default judgment despite representations that he would do so, and advising his clients to file a marriage dissolution action when they had no intention of dissolving their marriage.
Hess was retained by the defendants in a personal injury action arising from an automobile accident. The defendants’ insurance carrier had advised them that in light of the insurer’s analysis of liability, the severity of the injuries, and the limits of the defendants’ coverage, the defendants should retain independent counsel.
Hess filed a notice of appearance on behalf of the defendants, but took no further action. He did not notify the defendants’ insurer of the lawsuit. Hess took no action when he was notified of the motion for default, although he did notify his clients of the over $1,000,000 default judgment after it was entered. The defendants’ insurer was notified of the default judgment by plaintiff’s counsel, and the insurer retained another lawyer to represent it. Hess informed his clients that he would take care of the default judgment, and he informed the insurer’s lawyer that he would move to set aside the default judgment, but he did not.
Hess advised his clients to file for dissolution of their marriage, which they did, although they had no intention of actually dissolving their marriage. Hess helped the husband/defendant file for bankruptcy, and he received a discharge of the judgment/debt in the bankruptcy. The clients later filed a lawsuit against Hess, their insurer and their insurer’s lawyer, which was settled in such a way that Hess’s clients were released entirely of any financial obligation arising from the default judgment.
Hess’s conduct in failing to take appropriate actions on behalf of his clients, resulting in the default judgment against them, violated RPC 1.1 and 1.3. His failure to make sure his clients were fully informed of, and understood, the consequences of his actions and inaction violated RPC 1.4(a) and (b). His conduct in failing to move to set aside the default judgment, despite his representations that he would do so, and in advising his clients to file a marriage dissolution action when he knew they had no intention of dissolving their marriage, violated RPC 8.4(d).
Respondent was represented by Aaron Okrent. The Bar Association was represented by Disciplinary Counsel Jean Kelley McElroy.
|