Petition of Eddleman
| Decision Date | 07 October 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. C,C |
| Parties | Petition of William R. EDDLEMAN for Reinstatement as a Member of the Washington State Bar Association. D. 2504. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Schweppe, Doolittle, Krug & Tausend, Alfred J. Schweppe, Seattle, for petitioner.
Guttormsen, Scholfield, Willits & Ager, Jack P. Scholfield, Seattle, for the Bar Ass'n.
In 1963, the Board of Governors of the Washington State Bar Association, after a disciplinary hearing, recommended that William R. Eddleman be suspended from the practice of law for a period of 3 years. The board sent the case here for disposition. This court, February 13, 1964, declined to follow that recommendation but entered a judgment of disbarment and ordered that Mr. Eddleman's name be stricken from the court's roll of attorneys. In re Eddleman, 63 Wash.2d 775, 389 P.2d 296 (1964). Nearly 5 years later, Mr. Eddleman petitioned this court for reinstatement, which was denied October 9, 1969. In re Eddleman, 77 Wash.2d 42, 459 P.2d 387, 461 P.2d 9 (1969).
Petitioner is now before this court on his second petition for reinstatement, filed with the Board of Governors under DRA 8.2, and the board, after adversary hearing, now sends to this court its recommendation that it be granted.
The board's recommendation, entered in accordance with DRA 8.6, is based upon its finding No. 4:
That the petitioner has affirmatively proved and shown to the satisfaction of the Board of Governors that his attitude and conduct establish rehabilitation and present moral fitness for admission to the practice of law in this state; and that he should be admitted upon his satisfactorily passing the attorneys' examination required by Rule 4 of the Rules for Admission to Practice; and that petitioner's reinstatement as a member of the bar of this state will not be detrimental to the integrity and standing of the bar and the administration of justice nor contrary to the public interest.
Petitions for reinstatement after disbarment come to this court by way of the Board of Governors of the State Bar Association through Rule 8 of the Discipline Rules for Attorneys, a rule providing for investigation on behalf of and hearings before the Board of Governors with the board's findings, conclusions and recommendations to be sent to the Supreme Court. DRA 8.6. If this court grants reinstatement, the petitioner will then, upon payment of all prescribed fees and costs, be allowed to seek readmission by taking the attorney applicant's examination (APR 3), and upon passing that examination will be allowed to take the oath of attorney and will be fully restored to membership in the bar. DRA 8.7.
Although the board may or may not, in its discretion, refer the petition for reinstatement to the local administrative committee, the disciplinary board, the state bar counsel or others for investigation (DRA 8.4), the rules mean that once so referred the investigation shall be done with dispatch, vigor and thoroughness; and although the role of bar counsel is not,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reinstatement of Walgren, Matter of
...court has granted petitions for readmission from those who were originally denied readmission in several cases. See In re Eddleman, 79 Wash.2d 725, 489 P.2d 174 (1971) (second petition); In re Simmons, 81 Wash.2d 43, 499 P.2d 874 (1972) (second petition); In re Lonergan, 23 Wash.2d 767, 162......
-
Application of Christianson
...previously licensed in Washington or elsewhere. See Petition of Simmons, 81 Wash.2d 43, 499 P.2d 874 (1972), and Petition of Eddleman, 79 Wash.2d 725, 489 P.2d 174 (1971). In Florida the rules require that one who has been disbarred may be readmitted only upon full compliance with rules and......
- DuPont-Fort Lewis School Dist. No. 7 v. Bruno