Newport Attorney Reprimanded Again Doug Lambarth Agreed To Rebuke Rather Than Face A Hearing

Newport attorney Doug Lambarth is being reprimanded by the Washington State Bar Association for the second time in two years.

Lambarth, 56, is scheduled to stand before the association’s governors April 3 in Chelan for a formal rebuke that he botched a probate case he wasn’t competent to handle and continued to work on another case after getting fired.

As happened in July 1996, Lambarth agreed to the reprimand rather than face a hearing that could have resulted in more serious discipline.

Lambarth did not respond to a request for comment.

As part of his agreement with the state bar, Lambarth was required to pay $1,254 in restitution to a client for tax penalties caused by his negligence. He failed for more than two years to submit tax returns for a probate estate.

Lambarth also must refund $330 in fees to another client and pay $750 in attorney and administrative fees to the bar association.

A reprimand is two notches more severe than the “admonition” Pend Oreille County District Judge Chuck Baechler is to receive for similar failures to perform or to communicate with clients in his private practice.

Bar association documents say Lambarth’s new case is aggravated by his history of disciplinary offenses, “a pattern of misconduct,” vulnerability of the victim and the fact that he has “substantial” experience as a lawyer.

Mitigating factors are personal problems, including the terminal illness of his father, his cooperative attitude and delays in the disciplinary action against him.

A bar investigator found Lambarth “engaged in an area of practice in which he knew he was not competent” when he accepted a probate case in June 1992 for Oregon survivors of a deceased Newport resident.

The investigator said Lambarth failed to set up an estate bank account, failed to cash numerous mutual fund checks until they became stale, failed to perform the “basic step” of obtaining a tax identification number and failed to tell his clients some funds could have been transferred directly to the estate beneficiary without court action.

While Lambarth said he was still waiting for tax information, a court hearing originally set for July 1994 was rescheduled 18 times until May 1995. But Lambarth didn’t ask an accountant to prepare the tax returns until Nov. 23, 1994, bar investigator Bernadette Janet reported.

Finally, in May 1995, Lambarth hired a probate attorney at his own expense to finish the job.

The other case for which Lambarth is to be reprimanded next month involves an eviction in which he was hired to represent the landlords. A judge rejected Lambarth’s motion for a court order in July 1996 because he based his claim on an inappropriate law.

Without consulting his clients, Lambarth filed a motion for reconsideration. Shortly after that, his clients sent a letter dismissing him, but Lambarth went ahead with a reconsideration hearing and lost again. The clients had to hire another lawyer to resolve the matter.

Lambarth admitted to violating bar regulations by taking a case he knew he wasn’t competent to handle, failing to deposit estate funds into a bank account, failing for six months to answer clients’ questions and failing to withdraw from the eviction case after being dismissed.

, DataTimes