Facts: Petitioner Sandra Ferguson’s license to practice law was suspended for 90 days following a hearing before the respondent Washington State Bar Association’s disciplinary board, which found that Ferguson had violated Washington Rules of Professional Conduct 3.3(f), 3.4(c), 3.5(b), 8.4(c), and 8.4(d) by appearing ex parte before a judge without notice to opposing counsel and obtaining a finding of contempt against the opposing party on the basis of knowing misstatements of fact. Ferguson appealed the disciplinary board’s decision to the Supreme Court of Washington, asserting that its findings were not supported by substantial evidence and that it had erred in increasing her suspension to 90 days after the hearing officer had initially recommended a 30 day suspension.
Question(s): Were the disciplinary board’s findings that Ferguson had engaged in unprofessional conduct supported by substantial evidence?
If so, did the disciplinary board err in increasing Ferguson’s suspension?
Conclusion: Chief Justice Madsen’s opinion for the Court affirmed Ferguson’s suspension, concluding that substantial evidence supported the disciplinary board’s conclusion that Ferguson had committed willful and prejudicial deception and that the disciplinary board did not err in increasing Ferguson’s suspension to 90 days given that this sanction was nonetheless more lenient than that recommended by the the American Bar Association’s Standards for Imposing Lawyer Sanctions, which state that suspensions should generally be for a period of time equal to or greater than six months.
Docket No. 200,719-8 (from WSBA Case No. 27472)
Petitioner: Sandra Ferguson
(Counsel: Shawn Timothy Newman)
Respondent: Washington State Bar Association
(Counsel: M. Craig Bray, Robert Dean Welden, and Elizabeth Ann Turner)
Briefs:
Argument: Tuesday, June 8, 2010 9:00am
[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]
Audio: Washington Supreme Court
Decided: Thursday, February 3rd, 2011
Prevailing Party: Washington State Bar Association (Respondent)
Vote: 9-0
Citation: Pending
Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-2011)
Madsen
(Majority)
Johnson
Alexander
(Partial)
Sanders
Chambers
Owens
Fairhurst
Johnson
Stephens
Note: We post only slip opinion(s) as published at the time of the decision. Please consult Washington Reports printed volumes for the opinion(s) in their final form. Each opinion should appear next to the Justice who authored it.