| Description: |
Kent lawyer Edward L. Parks (WSBA No. 18356, admitted 1988) has been ordered disbarred by order of the Supreme Court, effective October 29, 1997, after a default hearing and review by the Disciplinary Board. The discipline is based upon Parks’ investment of a client’s money in a real estate development project in which others of Parks’ clients and Parks himself had an interest, without properly advising the client about the risks of the investment or the conflicts of interest in such a transaction. Despite repeated requests, the client’s money was never returned to him.
Parks represented a client in a variety of legal matters in the early 1990s. At all relevant times, Parks was aware that his client suffered from a drug problem which affected his understanding of legal matters and his ability to handle financial matters. During the course of the representation, the client inherited a house and more than $100,000 in cash. The client rapidly dissipated the cash, leaving the house as his only substantial asset. During the summer of 1994, the client asked Parks for help getting off drugs, and as part of his plan, the client decided to sell the house, put the proceeds in an account for his living expenses, and move to Mexico, where he could live more cheaply. The house was sold and over $72,000 in proceeds was placed in Parks’ IOLTA trust account. Parks knew that this money represented the client’s entire assets, on which he hoped to be able to live for many years.
Parks suggested that the client invest $40,000 in a real estate development project. Parks did not explain to the client that Parks represented the development company and its major shareholder personally, and that Parks himself was a shareholder and officer in the development company, and he did not explain the conflicts of interest inherent in these positions or obtain an informed written waiver of those conflicts. Parks also misrepresented the likely return from the investment in the project. At the time Parks suggested and made the investment, Parks knew that the project had not been able to secure complete financing, and that the purported owners of the land to be developed had pled guilty to and been sentenced for crimes arising from a land fraud scheme in another state. He also had written many letters to creditors of the development company for work on the project, putting off payment due to lack of financing.
Parks wrote two checks from the client’s money in his IOLTA account, payable to the development company’s major shareholder personally (not the development company). The first check was for $40,000, and the second, of which the client was not informed until after the fact, was for $15,000. The project was never developed. Despite repeated requests to both Parks and the development company, and assurances from Parks that the money would be returned, the money has not been returned to the client.
Parks’ actions violated RPC 1.4(a) and (b) (requiring adequate communication with clients), RPC 1.7(a) and (b), RPC 1.8(a), and RPC 1.9 (dealing with conflicts of interest and business transactions with clients), and RPC 1.13(a) and (b) (regarding representing clients with disabilities), and his actions subject Parks to discipline pursuant to RLD 1.1(a) (for acts involving moral turpitude, dishonesty, and/or corruption), 1.1(c) (for violating his oath of attorney), 1.1(i) (for violating the RPCs), and 1.1(p) (for conduct demonstrating unfitness to practice law).
The hearing officer was Ronald J. Bland of Seattle. Respondent defaulted. The Bar Association was represented by Disciplinary Counsel Jean Kelley McElroy.
|