In re Lambuth

• Decision Date: 21 January 1898
• Parties: IN RE LAMBUTH.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

51 P. 1071

18 Wash. 478

IN RE LAMBUTH.

Supreme Court of Washington

January 21, 1898

Proceedings for the disbarment of W. D. Lambuth. Discharged.

P. H Winston, Atty. Gen., for the State.

Harold Preston, for defendant.

PER CURIAM.

On January 11, 1898, upon an order made by the court, the attorney general filed a motion to strike from the rolls the name of W. D. Lambuth, an attorney and counselor at law in this court. The motion was based upon offensive and discourteous language used by the attorney in a petition for rehearing filed in the case of J. F. Judge et al. against the Bay Mill Company. The language used was as follows: "It is respectfully submitted to the court, with all deference to the wisdom of the individual judges thereof, that the decision in this case could not appear more prejudiced and biased in favor of interveners, and more liberal towards them, if the court had been under hypnotic suggestion at the hands of the interveners and the capitalists engaged in the buying and selling and dealing in lumber and shingles." Upon due service of the motion and order of the court, the attorney appeared and answered. It appears that the petition for rehearing was hurriedly prepared, and dictated by the attorney to a stenographer at 2 o'clock on Saturday afternoon, January 8th, and served and mailed to the clerk of this court at about 5 o'clock the same afternoon. The last day allowed for filing the petition was Monday, the 10th day of January. A short time after mailing the petition containing the offensive language, Mr. Lambuth had his attention called particularly to the words used in the petition by counsel upon whom it had been served. He then stated that he did not intend to use offensive language, and did not think it would be so construed, but that he would submit the petition immediately to a disinterested and distinguished member of the bar, and a former member of this court, residing in Seattle, for his advice, which he thereupon did; and on Monday, the 10th, and before any action had been taken by this court, Mr. Lambuth addressed a communication to the clerk of the court requesting that the language used in the petition, if offensive to the court, be stricken from the petition. This communication was not received until after the court had acted. Several members of the bar in the city of Seattle, of high standing, appeared with Mr. Lambuth when he answered and certified to his good standing at the bar, and his uniformly respectful and courteous demeanor to the courts where he appeared. In his answer, which was verified, he completely disavows any intentional disrespect or discourtesy to the court, and states he "had no intention or purpose, direct or remote, to be disrespectful to the court or to be discourteous, or to use language in any way discourteous or contemptuous," and that he never heard suggested and no thought had entered his mind of wrong in the action of the court or in any judge thereof, and that, if his...