| Description: |
Olympia lawyer Nathan Dysart (WSBA No. 15065, admitted 1985) has been ordered suspended from the practice of law for six months, pursuant to a stipulation for discipline, approved November 20, 1996. The discipline is based upon his neglect of three client matters, in violation of RPCs 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 3.2.
Holmes Matter
In 1990, lawyer Dysart agreed to represent client Holmes in a contract dispute. Holmes sold his vending machine business to Bert Gower, who then failed to pay on the promissory note. Dysart filed Holmes's lawsuit in King County Superior Court on or about December 6, 1990, but he did not send the Summons and Complaint to the Sheriff for service until April 4, 1991. This delay between filing and service violated RCW4. 16.170 (commencement of action) and the King County Superior Court Case Scheduling Order. Based on violation of the Scheduling Order, the Court set a non-compliance hearing. Based on the improper commencement of the lawsuit, the defendant demanded that the lawsuit be dismissed and threatened a counter-claim for rescission. Dysart, apparently, determined that the counter-claim was serious and that Holmes should dismiss his lawsuit. Dysart states that he sent Holmes a letter indicating that Dysart would allow the lawsuit to be dismissed if he had not heard from Holmes by the end of the month. This letter was addressed to Bart Gower, the opposing party, and contained Holmes's prior address. Holmes states that he never received this letter. Dysart did not attend the required noncompliance hearing and Holmes's lawsuit was dismissed. Dysart never told Holmes that his lawsuit had been dismissed.
Malit Matter
Client Malit retained lawyer Dysart in January 1991 to represent him on felony charges. The first trial ended in a mistrial, however, the second trial ended in a conviction. On June 19, 1992, Malit was sentenced, told Dysart that he wanted to appeal, and Dysart agreed to prosecute this appeal. Dysart filed Malit's Notice of Appeal on July 13, 1992, but did not pay the filing fee. On July 24, 1992, Dysart received a notice from the Court of Appeals Clerk stating that if he did not pay the filing fee or file an Order of Indigency by August 28, 1992, Malit's appeal would be dismissed. Dysart filed a Motion for Partial Indigency, but did not obtain an order until December 16, 1992—14 days after the Court of Appeals dismissed Malit's case for want of prosecution. Dysart wrote to Malit indicating that his appeal had been dismissed because the superior court failed to timely authorize payment for the transcripts. Two superior court judges and the Office of Assigned Counsel wrote to Malit explaining that it was Dysart's responsibility to perfect Malit's appeal.
Parsons Matter
Lawyer Dysart represented client Parsons in a dissolution and the subsequent bankruptcy. Dysart filed Parsons' Answer to Petition for Dissolution on the same day the court entered an Order of Default against Parsons. Dysart filed a Motion to Set Aside Default, which the court granted. Dysart did not inform his client of the Default Order or the Motion to Set Aside Default. In April 1991, Parsons signed what he believed to be the final pleadings in his dissolution and then left town for two months. During these two months, the opposing counsel scheduled Parsons' deposition. Dysart obtained a continuance of the deposition, but did not notify Parsons of the new date. At the conclusion of the dissolution, the court awarded a $500 judgment against Parsons for failure to attend two depositions. The court also awarded six additional judgments against Parsons. Dysart told Parsons not to pay the judgments because they would appeal. Dysart did file an appeal, but did not file a supersedeas bond to stay enforcement of the judgments during appeal.
In September 1992, Dysart filed Parsons’s bankruptcy petition. After the Court granted Dysart's motion to extend the time to file particular schedules, Dysart failed to file the schedules and the Court dismissed the case. Dysart did not notify Parsons that his bankruptcy had been dismissed.
For approximately one year after filing the civil appeal; Dysart continued to tell Parsons that he was receiving extensions from the Court of Appeals. After many motions to dismiss for failure to meet deadlines and several sanctions against Parsons for late filings, the court ordered that the case be automatically dismissed unless Dysart filed the Verbatim Report of Proceedings or confirmation that the automatic stay from the Bankruptcy Court was in effect. On March 28,1993, Dysart told Parsons that lawyer Dysart had forgotten to order the transcripts. The court reporter told him it would take three weeks, and that March 28. 1993, was the last day to perfect the appeal. On April 7, 1993, the Court of Appeals dismissed Parsons' case. The court reinstated Parson’s appeal, pursuant to a motion from Parson’s new counsel and payment of an additional $500 in attorneys fees.
The hearing officer was Judith Mandel of Port Orchard. Respondent was represented by Thomas Meyer. The Bar Association was represented by disciplinary counsel Julie Shankland.
|