1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Pamela D. Bucy 

Chief Disciplinary Counsel 

P.O. Box 1099 

Helena, Montana 59624 

Tel: (406) 442-1648 

pbuc crimontanaodc 

Office of Disciplinary Counsel 

BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON PRACTICE OF THE 

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * 

IN THE MATTER OF MARTHA L. GOODLOE, 

An Attorney at Law, 

Respondent. 

Supreme Court Cause No. 

ODC File No. 23-139 

COMPLAINT 

Rules 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, and 

1.16, MRPC 

By leave of the Commission on Practice granted on April 9, 2024, the Office 

of Disciplinary Counsel for the State of Montana ("ODC"), hereby charges Martha 

L. Goodloe with professional misconduct as follows: 

General Allegations 

1. Martha L. Goodloe, hereinafter referred to as Respondent, was admitted to 

the practice of law in the State of Montana in 1994, at which time Respondent took 

the oath required for admission, wherein they agreed to abide by the Rules of 

Complaint - Page 1 

05/13/2024

Case Number: PR 24-0299
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Professional Conduct, the Disciplinary Rules adopted by the Supreme Court, and the 

highest standards of honesty, justice and morality, including but not limited to, those 

outlined in parts 3 and 4 of Chapter 61, Title 37, Montana Code Annotated. 

2. The Montana Supreme Court has approved and adopted the Montana Rules 

of Professional Conduct ("MRPC"), governing the ethical conduct of attorneys 

licensed to practice in the State of Montana, which Rules were in effect at all times 

mentioned in this Complaint. 

3. D.A. contacted Respondent for assistance with her father's estate in early 

2019. In approximately August of 2019, D.A. requested Respondent draft a power 

of attorney for her mother. Respondent was paid for these services. Following 

medical complications, D.A.'s mother died. Respondent filed the Application for 

Informal Probate Intestate Estate and Appointment of Personal Representative on 

December 2, 2019. After the Application was filed, little action was taken in the 

case, resulting in the Court issuing an Order for Personal Representative to Close 

Estate or Show Cause, on May 9, 2023. On July 10, 2023, Respondent filed a 

Request to Withdraw as Attorney for Personal Representative, which the Court 

granted by Order dated July 11, 2023. On July 25, 2023, D.A. filed apro se Response 

to Respondent' s Motion. 

// 

// 

Complaint - Page 2 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Count One 

4. ODC realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 3 of the General 

Allegations as if fully restated in this Count One. 

5. Respondent failed to communicate with D.A. for nearly three (3) years and 

placed the duty of communication with her client. D.A. attempted to contact 

Respondent on numerous occasions, but Respondent was unresponsive. D.A. 

obtained necessary information about her mother's estate from the Clerk of Court. 

In addition, Respondent failed to notify D.A. of her intent to withdraw or provide 

her a copy of the Court's Show Cause Notice. 

6. Respondent's conduct outlined above constitutes a violation of Rule 1.4, 

Communication, MRPC. 

Count Two 

7. ODC realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 3 of the General 

Allegations and paragraphs 4 through 6 as if fully restated in this Count Two. 

8. Respondent failed to execute a written agreement to inform D.A. of the 

scope of the representation, and the basis or rate of the fee and expenses for which 

D.A. would be responsible. 

9. Respondent's conduct outlined above constitutes a violation of Rule 1.5, 

Fees, MRPC. 

// 

Complaint - Page 3 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Count Three 

10. ODC realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1 through 3 of the General 

Allegations and paragraphs 4 through 9 as if fully restated in this Count Three. 

11. Upon receipt of the Court' Show Cause Order, Respondent filed a Motion 

to Withdraw on July 10, 2023. Respondent failed to contact, discuss, or notify her 

client of her intention to withdraw prior to filing the Motion. In her Motion 

Respondent included information about the valuation of D.A.'s father's estate. The 

valuation information was garnered from Respondent's prior representation of D.A. 

and was included to demonstrate D.A.'s ability to pay necessary fees and costs. The 

Motion also indicated that D.A. had "refused" to pay her and had "refused" to sign 

a property deed. 

12. Importantly, the valuation of the estate was incorrect and D.A. had neither 

refused to sign a deed nor pay Respondent. D.A. had never been asked to sign a deed 

or for any form of payment. In fact, Respondent had never informed D.A. of the 

costs she could anticipate incurring or the costs of her services. Respondent did not 

even discuss the possibility of withdrawal with D.A. Rather, the last conversation 

Respondent had with her client indicated she would seek additional time from the 

Court and draft the agreed upon legal documents. D.A. was shocked and 

embarrassed by Respondent's filing. She was forced to serve as her own counsel in 

response to Respondent's motion. 

Complaint - Page 4 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

13. By disclosing information related to the representation of the client 

without the client's consent in her Motion to Withdraw, Respondent violated Rule 

1.6(a), Confidentiality of Information, MRPC. 

14. By using information relating to her prior representation of D.A. to her 

disadvantage in her Motion to Withdraw, Respondent violated Rule 1.8(b), Conflict 

of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules, MRPC. 

15. Respondent divulged information that was both untrue and was likely to, 

and did in fact, embarrass D.A. Respondent failed to provide D.A. with the Court's 

Show Cause Notice, which would have given D.A. the deadline for complying with 

the Court's Order, or to seek different counsel, or at least request additional time 

from the Court herself. Despite impending deadlines and a Motion which contained 

incorrect and untrue information which reflected poorly on her client, Respondent 

withdrew with literally no notice to her client. Respondent did not advise D.A. to 

seek new counsel or provide her with a copy of her file upon withdrawal. 

Respondent's conduct failed to protect the interest of her client in violation of Rule 

1.16(d), Declining or Terminating Representation, MRPC. 

WHEREFORE, the Office of Disciplinary Counsel prays: 

1. That a Citation be issued to the Respondent, to which shall be attached a 

copy of the complaint, requiring Respondent, within twenty-one (21) days after 

service thereof, to file a written answer to the complaint; 

Complaint - Page 5 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

2. That a formal hearing be had on the allegations of this complaint before an 

Adjudicatory Panel of the Commission; 

3. That the Adjudicatory Panel of the Commission make a report of its 

findings and recommendations after a formal hearing to the Montana Supreme 

Court, and, in the event the Adjudicatory Panel finds the facts warrant disciplinary 

action and recommends discipline, that the Commission also recommend the nature 

and extent of appropriate disciplinary action, including an award of costs and 

expenses incurred in investigating and prosecuting this matter; and, 

4. For such other and further relief as deemed necessary and proper. 

DATED this 13 lay of May, 2024. 

Complaint - Page 6 

OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL 

By: AAA,t1L,_

Pamela D. Bucy 

Chief Disciplinary Counsel