In re Ward

• Citation: 179 P. 76,106 Wash. 147
• Decision Date: 12 March 1919
• Docket Number: 7.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Washington
• Parties: In re WARD.

179 P. 76

106 Wash. 147

In re WARD.

No. 7.

Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

March 12, 1919

Proceedings for the disbarment of E. C. Ward, attorney at law. Suspension for one year ordered.

McMaster, Hall & Drowley, of Vancouver, Magill McKenney & Brush, of Kelso, and N. B. Brooks, of Goldendale for appellant.

L. L Thompson, of Olympia, and R. M. Burgunder, of Colfax, for respondent.

MAIN J.

This is a proceeding for the disbarment, of E. C. Ward, an attorney at law, a resident of and licensed to practice law in this state. The proceeding was instituted by a complaint filed with the state board of law examiners pursuant to chapter 115, Laws of 1917. The board of examiners, at a hearing at which the accused attorney appeared, heard the evidence offered in support of and against the charges made in the complaint, and found that one of the charges was well proven and recommended that an order of disbarment be entered.

The first error assigned challenges the constitutionality of the act under which the proceedings were instituted. This question was met and determined in the case of In re Bruen, 172 P. 1152. It was there held that the act was 'in all respects constitutional except the provision for a final order or judgment of disbarment by the board of law examiners.' In that opinion the objections now urged were fully discussed, and we adhere to the views there expressed.

The cause was first presented to the court during the May term of the year 1918. While the cause was still pending, and before an opinion had been filed, counsel for the attotney against whom the proceeding was brought, requested and was given permission to present a motion for the remanding of the case to the board of law examiners, for the taking of additional testimony. The motion was subsequently made, supported by affidavits. Prior to the hearing on the motion counsel in the case stipulated that the affidavits filed in support of the motion might be considered by the court as original evidence upon the merits. Upon the record thus made the cause was again heard, and is now before us for final determination.

The charge upon which the board of law examiners recommended disbarment grew out of facts briefly stated as follows: On the 20th day of November, 1911, one J. A. Gilmore filed a petition in the superior court of Klickitat county, asking for letters of administration upon the estate of Joseph Green, who at the time was supposed to be deceased because he had been absent for more than seven years from Klickitat county, and had not been heard from at all during that time. E. C. Ward appeared as attorney for the petitioner, and the petition prayed for his (Ward's) appointment as administrator. After a hearing upon the petition, the court signed an order making the appointment as requested. After this order had been signed and entered the administrator named therein went to the referee in another proceeding, in whose possession were funds beloging to the estate of Joseph Green, and requested that such funds be...