| Description: |
Robert C. Brungardt (WSBA No. 8214, admitted 1978), of Shelton, was ordered to receive a reprimand on August 2, 2005, following a stipulation approved by a hearing officer. This order is based on his conduct in 2003 and 2004 involving lack of diligence and improper withdrawal from representation.
In March 2001, Mr. Brungardt was hired to commence a lawsuit on behalf of a client who had been involved in an automobile accident on March 10, 2001. The client and Mr. Brungardt met and signed a fee agreement. In August 2003, Mr. Brungardt served a complaint on the allegedly at-fault party. Shortly thereafter, Mr. Brungardt and the other party's insurer reached an agreement that the complaint would not be filed without 30 days' notice, and Mr. Brungardt sent the insurer a demand package. In February 2004, about two weeks before expiration of the statute of limitations, Mr. Brungardt told his client that he was terminating the representation. The client contacted several other lawyers. These lawyers declined to take the case because the statute of limitations would soon expire. On March 1, 2004, the client picked up her file from Mr. Brungardt's office. On March 3, 2004, one week before the statute of limitations was to expire, Mr. Brungardt filed the complaint. Because Mr. Brungardt had not served the complaint within 90 days of filing it, or filed the complaint within 90 days of serving it, Mr. Brungardt failed to commence the action and thereby toll the statute of limitations.
In March 2004, another lawyer agreed to take the client's case and spoke with Mr. Brungardt by telephone. Mr. Brungardt told the new lawyer that he had made a demand on the opposing party's insurer. The file that the client had picked up from Mr. Brungardt's office did not contain a copy of the demand letter. During the telephone conversation, the new lawyer asked Mr. Brungardt for a copy of the demand letter. Mr. Brungardt did not respond to that request. The new lawyer sent two written requests to Mr. Brungardt for a copy of the demand letter, for any response received, and for notes that Mr. Brungardt might have taken. Mr. Brungardt did not reply to either of the written requests, nor did he respond to multiple telephone calls made by the new lawyer's legal assistant asking about the documents that had been requested. The new lawyer subsequently settled the case on behalf of the client.
Mr. Brungardt's conduct violated RPC 1.3, requiring a lawyer to act with reasonable diligence and promptness in representing a client; and RPC 1.15, governing the circumstances in which a lawyer may withdraw from representation, and requiring a lawyer to take reasonable steps to protect a client's interests, such as giving reasonable notice to the client, allowing time for employment of other counsel, surrendering papers and property to which the client is entitled and refunding any advance payment of fee that has not been earned.
Scott G. Busby represented the Bar Association. Mark J. Fucile represented Mr. Brungardt. Kimberly A. Boyce was the hearing officer. |