| Description: |
Edmonds lawyer John L. Radder (WSBA No. 16416, admitted 1986) has been ordered suspended for 90 days, pursuant to a stipulation to discipline, approved by the Supreme Court October 28, 1997. The discipline is based on altering billing statements by switching initials, dates, or amounts of time worked on a client’s matter and on failing to take prompt corrective action when he learned of initial switching by his partner, lawyer Wade Dann.
In September 1989, a construction company hired Radder’s then-partner, Wade Dann, to present a claim regarding a highway construction project. Various firm personnel worked on the client’s matter, including Radder and a nonlawyer construction claims analyst. In February 1992, the client told the firm it no longer wanted the particular construction claims analyst working on its matter. During the following five months, the firm nevertheless had that claims analyst working on the client’s matter. Radder and Dann altered the firm’s billing records by substituting Radder’s initials for those of the claims analyst to conceal the fact that the claims analyst was still working on the matter.
At that time, the firm billed Radder’s time at $140 per hour and the claims analyst’s at $93 per hour. Substitution of Radder’s initials for the claims analyst’s in the billings resulted in the client’s being overbilled approximately $2,500. But the firm wrote off more than that amount during the same period.
In June 1992, Radder wrote the client a letter in which he stated "[a]lso at your direction, we did not utilize [the claims analyst] to continue and finalize the presentation materials." Radder knew that statement was untrue. The client found out the statement was untrue in about February 1993 when the Association’s investigation began. The client continued to employ Radder and the firm after February 1993. Radder became aware of other initial-switching by Dann. In mid-July 1992, Radder conducted an impromptu partnership meeting not attended by Dann at which Radder and the only other partner voted to stop the practice of initial switching on client bills.
By switching or assisting in switching initials on client billings and writing the untruthful letter to the client, Radder violated RPC 8.4(c) and RLD 1.1(a), which prohibit dishonesty. By not taking corrective action regarding Dann’s conduct, Radder violated RPC 5.1(c)(2), which requires a partner to take reasonable remedial action when he knows of a partner’s misconduct at a time when its consequences can be avoided or mitigated.
David Cluxton, Lisa Crawford, and Joy McLean represented the Bar Association. Radder represented himself.
|