Hawkins, In re, No. CD

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Washington
Writing for the CourtROSELLINI; HAMILTON
Citation81 Wn.2d 504,503 P.2d 95
PartiesIn the Matter of the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Kenneth C. HAWKINS, an Attorney at Law. 2430.
Decision Date16 November 1972
Docket NumberNo. CD

Page 504

81 Wn.2d 504
503 P.2d 95
In the Matter of the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Kenneth
C. HAWKINS, an Attorney at Law.
No. CD 2430.
Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.
Nov. 16, 1972.

[503 P.2d 96] Jack P. Scholfield, Bar Counsel, Seattle, for appellant.

Kenneth C. Hawkins, Elwood Hutcheson, Yakima, for respondent.

ROSELLINI, Associate Justice.

This matter is before the court upon a petition of the Washington State Bar Association for an order to show cause why the respondent should not be adjudged in contempt of this court's order, entered March 5, 1970 (In re Hawkins, 77 Wash.2d 777, 466 P.2d 147 (1970)), suspending him from the practice of law for a period of 18 months beginning June 1, 1970. After the order to show cause was issued, the matter was referred to a hearing panel of the bar association to determine the facts.

Page 505

The record and the findings of the panel are now before us.

From these, it appears that the respondent's listing as an attorney was continued in the Yakima telephone directory published for the year October 1970 to October 1971, although he had an opportunity to withdraw that listing after he was notified of his suspension; that a resident of Yakima, needing the services of an attorney, found his name in the directory and called him; that she was given an appointment and was directed by him to his unmarked office and that she went to the office and discussed her legal problem 1 with the respondent; that he failed to advise her that he was not authorized to practice law and could not give her advice, but instead led her to believe that he would assist her; that he made no efforts in her behalf but failed to so advise her when she inquired as to what results he had obtained; and that after several telephone calls to his office, she engaged the services of another attorney and learned for the first time that the respondent was not authorized to practice law in the state of Washington. It also appears that the respondent did not charge or collect a legal fee from this woman.

It is the position of the bar association that by his conduct in failing to change his listing in the telephone directory, in failing to advise a prospective client that he was not authorized to practice law and in allowing her to believe that he would write a letter or give her other legal assistance, the respondent held himself out as entitled to practice law and thereby violated this court's order of suspension.

RCW 2.48.180 provides:

Any person who, not being an active member of the state bar, or who after he has been disbarred or while suspended from membership in the state bar, as by this chapter provided, shall practice law, or hold himself out as entitled to practice law, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor: Provided, however, Nothing herein contained

Page 506

shall be held to in any way affect[503 P.2d 97] the power of the courts to grant injunctive relief or to punish as for contempt.

The statute makes clear that holding oneself out as entitled to practice law constitutes contempt of an order of suspension. See also People v. Humbert, 86 Colo. 426, 282 P. 263 (1929) and State ex rel. Patton v. Marron, 22 N.M. 632, 167 P. 9 (1917), and cases cited therein.

The respondent takes the position that no harm resulted from this particular incident, since he rendered no services and charged no fee. We find this argument untenable. Under CPR DR6--101(A)(3), the code of professional conduct declares that a lawyer shall not neglect a matter entrusted to him.

In In re Vandercook, 78 Wash.2d 301, 304, 474 P.2d 106, 108 (1970), we said:

A lawyer owes 'entire devotion to the interest of the client.' CPE 15. He should with reasonable dispatch and industry, employ all honorable means available within the law and the ethics of the profession to advance his client's interest and protect his client's rights. An attorney owes a duty of punctuality--not only to the courts and public but to his client. CPE 21...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • Practice and procedure: Patent and trademark cases rules of practice; representation of others before Patent and Trademark Office,
    • United States
    • Federal Register December 12, 2003
    • 12 Diciembre 2003
    ...same cases considered when current Sec. 10.158(c) was proposed, including In re Christianson, 215 N.W. 2d 920 (N.D. 1974); In re Hawkins, 503 P.2d 95 (Wash. 1972); Florida Bar v. Thomson, 354 So.2d 3000 (Fla. 1975); In re Kraus, 670 P.2d 1012 (Ore. 1983); In re Easler, 272 S.E.2d 32 (S.C. 1......
  • Part II
    • United States
    • Federal Register December 12, 2003
    • 12 Diciembre 2003
    ...same cases considered when current Sec. 10.158(c) was proposed, including In re Christianson, 215 N.W. 2d 920 (N.D. 1974); In re Hawkins, 503 P.2d 95 (Wash. 1972); Florida Bar v. Thomson, 354 So.2d 3000 (Fla. 1975); In re Kraus, 670 P.2d 1012 (Ore. 1983); In re Easler, 272 S.E.2d 32 (S.C. 1......
  • Krogh, In re, No. CD
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 6 Junio 1975
    ...the legal profession as well as the judicial system. In re Greenlee, 82 Wash.2d 390, 510 P.2d 1120 (1973); In re Hawkins, 81 Wash.2d 504, 503 P.2d 95 (1972); In re Steinberg, 44 Wash.2d 707, 269 P.2d 970 In making the ultimate determination as to the measure of disciplinary action, we give ......
  • State v. Athan, No. 75312-1.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 10 Mayo 2007
    ...even though, in fact, no services are rendered and no fee charged. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Hawkins, 81 Wash.2d 504, 507, 503 P.2d 95 (1972). The actions of the investigating officers here in creating a fictitious law firm and a fictitious class action lawsuit and in holding th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
  • Krogh, In re, No. CD
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 6 Junio 1975
    ...the legal profession as well as the judicial system. In re Greenlee, 82 Wash.2d 390, 510 P.2d 1120 (1973); In re Hawkins, 81 Wash.2d 504, 503 P.2d 95 (1972); In re Steinberg, 44 Wash.2d 707, 269 P.2d 970 In making the ultimate determination as to the measure of disciplinary action, we give ......
  • State v. Athan, No. 75312-1.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 10 Mayo 2007
    ...even though, in fact, no services are rendered and no fee charged. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Hawkins, 81 Wash.2d 504, 507, 503 P.2d 95 (1972). The actions of the investigating officers here in creating a fictitious law firm and a fictitious class action lawsuit and in holding th......
  • Salvesen, Matter of, No. CD
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • 24 Julio 1980
    ...and In re Smith, 83 Wash.2d 659, 521 P.2d 212 (1974); In re Greenlee, 82 Wash.2d 390, 510 P.2d 1120 (1973); In re Hawkins, 81 Wash.2d 504, 503 P.2d 95 (1972); In re Steinberg, 44 Wash.2d 707, 269 P.2d 970...
  • State v. Schumacher, No. 46581
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Kansas
    • 2 Marzo 1974
    ...advise a prospective client that he was not authorized to practice law, violated the order of suspension. In re Hawkins, 81 Wash.2d 504, 503 P.2d 95 Page 1124 (1972). Washington had a statute forbidding disbarred or suspended attorneys to hold themselves out as entitled to practice law. It ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT