One cannot look upon this effort as personal

Posted On Dec 3 2016 by

Saturday, December 3, 2016, 8:19 am To do this work, one cannot take it personally. Success is not personal. Failure is not personal. This work is something else. It is a battle for ideas and ideals. There are winners and losers, but only in the battle which is being played out. I say I am advocating a better Washington Lawyer Discipline System. The bar association and its representatives say I am a disgruntled lawyer who should be disciplined, suspended or disbarred. They are wrong. I am not, nor do I feel, estranged from the law and the practice of law. …


WSBA Records Case VII: Does the Washington Public Records Act Apply?

Posted On Sep 29 2016 by

Case VII is a WSBA Records Request.  The court rule regarding Bar Records, GR 12.4, is used.  The question which will eventually be raised and decided is whether the Court Rule GR 12.4 applies to the exclusion of the Washington Public Records Act, RCW Ch. 42.56. In the recent the WSBA’s  Response to Eugster’s Appeal to the Records Review Appeal Officer under GR 12.4, the WSBA takes the position the Washington Public Records Act, RCW Ch. 42.56, does not apply.  Here is what the WSBA says: As a preliminary matter, access to Bar records is governed by GR 12.4. Therefore, …


WSBA Today: Big Changes are Coming

Posted On Sep 14 2016 by

I watched a WSBA Webinar today.  It was about changes in WSBA governance.  The changes have been discussed and commented upon for over two years.  In September at the WSBA BOG (Board of Governors) meeting certain items will be discussed. The person to whom questions concerning the changes and the reason for the changes were addressed to Robin Hayes, the Spokane lawyer who will succeed Bill Hyslop (a former partner of mine).  Ms. Hayes was quite energetic in her answers but each time she avoided the answers which truly explained what the “New WSBA” was about.  She was politically adept, surprisingly …


Unauthorized Practice of Law — Minnesota v. Colorado Attorney Helping In-laws

Posted On Sep 2 2016 by

In late August, 2016, the Minnesota Supreme Court admonished a Colorado lawyer for helping his in-laws regarding a judgment against them by a condominium association.  The judgment was about $2,500.  The Colorado lawyer corresponded with the Minnesota lawyer representing the association.  The Minnesota attorney filed a complaint.  The bar and the Minnesota Supreme court held that the communications with the Minnesota attorney by the Colorado attorney about his in-law’s judgment consisted of the unauthorized practice of law.  Minn. High Court Scolds Colo. Atty for In-Laws Case.  The decision can be found here — Case A15-2078, Supreme Court of the State …


ABA Law School Accreditation Authority Questioned

Posted On Aug 9 2016 by

National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity  of the Department of Education.  See this discription of the NACIQI The Post in Findlaw NACIQI: ABA Is out of Touch and Should Lose Accreditation Power  says that the ABA accredition power is being questioned.  Some say the ABA is out of touch with the times. The transcript can be found at this link


Are Bar Association Lawyer Discipline Systems Rigged?

Posted On Aug 9 2016 by

A article in appearing on August 3, 2016, in the Find Law Blog raises the question in Peeping Tom Lawyer Faces Disbarment. Is the System Rigged? The author Jonathan Tung, a lawyer, writes It’s a matter of perspective, of course, but lawyers facing ethics issues have frequently observed that the ethics process is extremely one sided. At risk of sounding like Donald Trump, we have to ask, is this system rigged? The bar report can be found at this link. One of the ways to rig the discipline system is to have the bar association fill all of the positions in …


WSBA v. Eugster VI — Motion to Dismiss

Posted On Aug 5 2016 by

Today I filed a motion to dismiss the action against me.  I assert that the proceedings are void because they violate my rights to procedural due process of law under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Wash. Const. Art I, Section 3.  A proceeding which violates fundamental procedural due process rights is void under Washington law. Motion to Dismiss The motion to dismiss is also a response to the WSBA’s Motion to Strike.  More on this later.  


Future of the WSBA: A Voluntary Washington Bar Association

Posted On Jul 15 2016 by

The future WSBA will become, will have to become, an entity which can no longer compel Washington Lawyers to be members and pay dues.  It will become voluntary.  One of its activities will be the continuation the WSBA’s Continuing Education Function. As it confronts this possibility, this necessity, one needs only look at how much costs privately for a lawyer to gain CLE credit in certain areas of the law.  Today, I received a advertisement of a private CLE entity regarding the Columbia River. I cannot imagine a lawyer who would not like to know about the law and the Columbia …


Case VI – WSBA v. Eugster, an update

Posted On Jul 10 2016 by

Much has happened regarding Case VI.  The WSBA has filed charges against Eugster; this is the “Formal Complaint.” Eugster has responded with his Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counter and Third-Party Claims together with an appendix which includes the Counter and Third-Party Claims. Why the Counter Claims?  Recall that in Case IV, Eugster v. WSBA et al., the Superior Court trial judge, Sam Cozza, dismissed the case (a Civil Rights section 1983 case) on the basis that the Superior Court did not have jurisdiction.  Well, “who does.” You might ask.  You might say the Superior Court has original jurisdiction in all …


Case V, Eugster v. Littlewood (WAED), dismissed

Posted On Jul 3 2016 by

District Court Judge Thomas Rice dismissed Eugster’s case based on res judicata.  The judge said that Case IV which is the state court case regarding claims that the WSBA Discipline System violates constitutional rights was dismissed with prejudice and the District Court Case (Case V) is bound by the court’s decision.  Judge Rice said the state court decision was a decision on the merits.  It was not.  It was a decision not to take jurisdiction of the case, that is not a merits decision, why because the case was not decided.  (It was punted on jurisdictional grounds.)  Judge Rice is …