| Description: |
Sharon Bartu (WSBA No. 17080, admitted 1987), of Vancouver, has been suspended for six months effective March 12, 2001, by order of the Supreme Court approving a stipulation. This discipline is based on her failing to adequately supervise a nonlawyer assistant, contacting a represented party directly, and failing to comply with a deposition subpoena from 1996 through 2000.
Matter 1: In November 1996, Ms. Bartu agreed to represent the husband in a marriage dissolution action. In February 1997, opposing counsel sent a proposed final decree to Ms. Bartu. The wife mistakenly believed that the divorce was final and married again. In April 1997, Ms. Bartu referred her client to her contract legal assistant regarding possible bigamy charges against his former wife. Ms. Bartu attended the conference in which the client and the legal assistant discussed the work to be performed. Ms. Bartu knew that the legal assistant intended to contact the wife directly about the bigamy allegation and the potential for criminal prosecution. The legal assistant contacted the wife on April 14, 1997, and suggested to her that if she would give her interest in the marital home to the husband, the legal assistant would not report the bigamy. On July 2, the husband called the wife from Ms. Bartu’s office to discuss terms of the settlement, and asked her to sign final documents at Ms. Bartu’s office, but she refused.
Matter 2: In May 1997, Ms. Bartu agreed to represent the husband in a marriage dissolution matter. On August 19, Ms. Bartu sent opposing counsel a letter indicating that he could talk to her client directly. Opposing counsel responded, declining to contact Ms. Bartu’s client. After receiving opposing counsel’s letter, her client sent a letter to his wife, which Ms. Bartu edited and typed. The letter proposed a property distribution and suggested that opposing counsel did not have the wife’s best interests in mind.
Matter 3: Ms. Bartu failed to respond to written requests for information from the Bar Association. After receiving a subpoena and notice for deposition, Ms. Bartu sent a letter to the Bar Association refusing to attend the deposition in Seattle, as required by the Rules for Lawyer Discipline. Ms. Bartu failed to appear for the deposition.
Ms. Bartu’s conduct violated RPCs 5.3(b) and (c), requiring lawyers to supervise nonlawyer assistants and make reasonable efforts to ensure an assistant’s conduct is compatible with the lawyer’s professional obligations; 4.2, prohibiting communicating about the subject matter of the representation with a party the lawyer knows is represented, without opposing counsel’s consent; 8.4(a), prohibiting attempting to violate the RPCs through the acts of another; and RLD 2.8, requiring lawyers to promptly comply with requests for information relevant to grievances.
Becky Neal represented the Bar Association. Ms. Bartu represented herself.
|