Facts: William Noble was suspended from the practice of law for three months for misappropriating funds in his capacity as executor of his deceased father’s estate after a hearing before the Washington State Bar Association’s disciplinary board. The disciplinary board chose to suspend Noble rather than disbar him in light of the hearing officer’s conclusion that Noble’s alcoholism constituted a mitigating factor. The Supreme Court of Washington subsequently initiated review of the hearing officer’s determination regarding mitigating circumstances and the three-month suspension imposed by the disciplinary board?

Question(s): Does alcoholism constitute a significant mitigating factor in bar discipline cases?

Was the disciplinary board’s sanction appropriate in light of the circumstances of the case?

Conclusion: Justice Pearson’s opinion for the Court affirmed the sanctions that had been imposed upon Noble, concluding that Noble’s alcoholism as well as his successful ability to subsequently control it, his admission of guilt, and his cooperation with the bar association in its investigation were all properly considered as mitigating factors. Moreover, the Court held that a three-month suspension was within the range of sanctions imposed for trust account violations where mitigating circumstances were present and therefore not clearly disproportionate to Noble’s conduct.

Docket No. C.D. 5608

Petitioner: Washington State Bar Association

(Counsel: Leland G. Ripley)

Respondent: William Noble

(Counsel: Shannon Stafford)

Decided: Thursday, July 28th, 1983

Prevailing Party: William Noble (Respondent)

Vote: 5-4

Opinion: 100 Wn.2d 88 (1983)

Court: Williams1 Court (1983-1984)

Williams

Rosellini

Stafford

Utter

Brachtenbach

Dolliver

Dimmick

Dore

Pearson