Opinion ID: 2548391
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 13

Heading: proportionality (swartz matter)

Text: Proportionality is an important factor to consider because it aids in maintaining consistency and fundamental fairness. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Kuvara, 149 Wash.2d 237, 258, 66 P.3d 1057 (2003). The presumptive sanction might not be adopted where it departs significantly from sanctions imposed in similar cases. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Noble, 100 Wash.2d 88, 95, 667 P.2d 608 (1983). Romero claims that [e]ven if the facts as asserted by the hearing officer are accepted as true, ... an isolated instance of using a client's $726 for 98 days does not merit disbarment. Opening Br. of Resp't at 29. We agree. If Romero's only misconduct was the misuse of Swartz's funds, disbarment would not be warranted. Disbarment significantly departs from the sanction found appropriate for similar misconduct. We imposed a two-year suspension on an attorney who used up to $30,000 of client funds for almost a year. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Tasker, 141 Wash.2d 557, 572, 9 P.3d 822 (2000). We also imposed a two-year suspension on an attorney whose misuse of client funds we described as extremely serious .... not only in nature but in number. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Salvesen, 94 Wash.2d 73, 76, 79, 614 P.2d 1264 (1980). Additionally, we suspended an attorney's 60-day suspension for 10 trust account violations which spanned four years. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Malone, 107 Wash.2d 263, 264, 728 P.2d 1029 (1986). In all three cases, we found the fact that no client lost any trust funds a major mitigating factor. In re Tasker, 141 Wash.2d at 569, 9 P.3d 822; In re Malone, 107 Wash.2d at 265, 728 P.2d 1029; In re Salvesen, 94 Wash.2d at 77, 614 P.2d 1264. Similarly, in this case, Romero's client did not lose any trust funds. Romero's failure to put client funds in trust and make a timely payment on behalf of his client is less egregious than Tasker's, Salvesen's, and Malone's misuse of client funds. Accordingly, Romero's misuse of Swartz's funds alone would not merit the sanction of disbarment. See In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Petersen, 120 Wash.2d 833, 873, 846 P.2d 1330 (1993).