THESE NOTICES OF THE IMPOSITION OF DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS AND ACTIONS are published pursuant to Rule 3.5(c) of the Washington Supreme Court Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct. Active links to directory listings, RPC definitions, and documents related to the disciplinary matter can be found at the links below or by looking up the respondent in the Discipline Notice Directory at https://mywsba.org/PersonifyEbusiness/DisciplineNoticeDirectory.
As some WSBA members share the same or similar names, please read all disciplinary notices carefully for names, cities, and bar numbers.
Find prior Discipline & Other Regulatory Notices here.
Disbarred
Thi Anh Huynh (WSBA No. 34947, admitted 2004) of Seattle, was disbarred, effective 9/12/2024, by order of the Washington Supreme Court. Henry Cruz and Benjamin J. Attanasio acted as disciplinary counsel. Thi Anh Huynh represented themselves. Bruce E. Heller was the hearing officer. Randolph O. Petgrave III was the settlement hearing officer.
The lawyer’s conduct violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.7 (Conflict of Interest: Current Clients), 1.8 (Conflict of Interest: Current Clients: Specific Rules), 1.15A (Safeguarding Property), 8.4(b) (Criminal Act), 8.4(c) (Dishonesty, Fraud, Deceit or Misrepresentation), 8.4(i) (Moral Turpitude, Corruption or Disregard of Rule of Law), 8.4(n) (Unfitness to Practice).
Huynh was found to have violated the Rules of Professional Conduct by: 1) entering into a business transaction with a client – by obtaining a loan for the client and using the proceeds for respondent’s own purposes – without i) providing the client with anything in writing regarding the transaction, ii) advising the client in writing to seek, and providing them a reasonable opportunity to seek, independent counsel, or iii) obtaining the client’s informed consent to the transaction; 2) using the loan proceeds for respondent’s own use and thereby committing the crime of theft as defined in RCW 9A.56.020; 3) executing a Full Reconveyance Deed falsely stating that the investors had made a written request to reconvey and thereby committing the crime of false representation concerning title as defined in RCW 9.38.020; 4) using investor funds for respondent’s personal use and other purposes unrelated to the investment and thereby committing the crime of theft as defined in RCW 9A.56.020; 5) providing investors with false accounting of their investment; 6) representing a client in a loan transaction in which another client was directly adverse; 7) representing a client in a litigation matter where there was a significant risk that the representation would be materially limited by respondent’s responsibilities to another client or by respondent’s personal interest; 8) entering into a business transaction with a client without: i) providing the client with anything in writing regarding the transaction, ii) advising the client in writing to seek, and providing them a reasonable opportunity to seek, independent counsel, or iii) obtaining the client’s informed consent to the transaction; 9) using money from a loan obtained for a client for respondent’s personal use and other purposes unrelated to the client and thereby committing the crime of theft as defined in RCW 9A.56.020.
Decision documents: Hearing Officer’s Decision; Disciplinary Board Order Adopting Hearing Officer’s Decision; and Washington Supreme Court Order.
James Mills (WSBA No. 53561, admitted 2018) of Portland, OR, was disbarred, effective 10/02/2024, by order of the Washington Supreme Court imposing reciprocal discipline in accordance with an order of the Supreme Court of the State of Oregon. For more information, see https://www.osbar.org/bulletin/issues/2024/2024October/
offline/download.pdf. Henry Cruz acted as disciplinary counsel. James Mills represented themselves.
Decision document: The Washington Supreme Court Order.
Lee Howard Rousso (WSBA No. 33340, admitted 2003) of Renton, was disbarred, effective 10/15/2024, by order of the Washington Supreme Court. Kathy Jo Blake acted as disciplinary counsel. Lee Howard Rousso represented themselves. Jehiel Baer was the hearing officer.
The lawyer’s conduct violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: 8.4(b) (Criminal Act), 8.4(i) (Moral Turpitude, Corruption or Disregard of Rule of Law).
Rousso was found to have violated the Rules of Professional Conduct by 1) committing the crime of Assault in the Second Degree against a public official or officer of the court in retaliation of the public official’s performance of his or her duty to the criminal justice system; 2) committing the crime of Felony Stalking against a public official or officer of the court in retaliation of the public official’s performance of his or her duty to the criminal justice system; 3) committing the crime of Felony Stalking.
Decision documents: Hearing Officer’s Decision; Disciplinary Board Order Declining Sua Sponte Review and Adopting Hearing Officer’s Decision; and Washington Supreme Court Order.
Resigned in Lieu of Discipline
Ajili Hodari (WSBA No. 37251, admitted 2006) of Seattle, resigned in lieu of discipline, effective 09/27/2024. The lawyer agrees that they are aware of the alleged misconduct in disciplinary counsel’s Statement of Alleged Misconduct and rather than defend against the allegations, they wish to permanently resign from membership in the Association. Francisco Rodriguez acted as disciplinary counsel. Leland G. Ripley represented respondent.
The Statement of Alleged Misconduct reflects the following violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.2 (Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority Between Client and Lawyer), 1.7 (Conflict of Interest: Current Clients), 1.15A (Safeguarding Property), 1.15B (Required Trust Account Records), 4.1 (Truthfulness in Statements to Others), 4.3 (Dealing With Unrepresented Person), 8.1 (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), 8.4(c) (Dishonesty, Fraud, Deceit or Misrepresentation), 8.4(d) (Prejudicial to the Admin of Justice).
Hodari’s alleged misconduct includes: 1) concurrently representing two clients in the same transaction when there was a significant risk that the representation of one would be materially limited by respondent’s responsibilities to the other, without having first obtained informed consent of each client in writing; 2) failing to disclose respondent’s concurrent representation of a client while stating and implying that respondent was disinterested, and by failing to make reasonable efforts to clarify a contracting party’s misunderstanding regarding respondent’s role in the transactions with one of his clients when the contracting party was not represented by counsel and when respondent reasonably should have known that the contracting party misunderstood respondent’s role; 3) by falsely stating that respondent represented only one client and did not represent the other; 4) by making a false statement to ODC during a disciplinary investigation; 5) by failing to maintain a check register or equivalent for respondent’s trust account; 6) by failing to maintain client ledgers; 7) by failing to properly reconcile the check register to the bank statements and failing to properly reconcile the check register to the combined total of all client ledgers; 8) by failing to maintain copies of deposit slips and cancelled checks for respondent’s trust account.
Decision document: Resignation Form of Ajili Hodari ELC 9.3(b).
Suspended
Mike Moceri (WSBA No. 47787, admitted 2014) of Tacoma, was suspended for 18 months, effective 9/26/2024, by order of the Washington Supreme Court. Claire Carden acted as disciplinary counsel. Mike Moceri represented themselves. Joseph M. Mano Jr. was the hearing officer.
The lawyer’s conduct violated the following Rules of Professional Conduct: 1.15A (Safeguarding Property), 1.16 (Declining or Terminating Representation), 1.3 (Diligence), 1.4 (Communication), 1.5 (Fees), 8.1 (Bar Admission and Disciplinary Matters), 8.4(d) (Prejudicial to the Admin of Justice), 8.4(l), (Prohibiting a Lawyer from Violating a Duty or Sanction Imposed by or Under the Rules for Enforcement of Lawyer Conduct in Connection With a Disciplinary Matter).
Moceri was found to have violated the Rules of Professional Conduct by: 1) failing to diligently represent a client; 2) failing to keep the client informed about the case and/or by failing to provide them with an invoice or other information about how respondent’s fee was earned; 3) failing to deposit a payment received from the client to respondent’s trust account; 4) charging for work that was of no use to the client and/or failing to refund unearned fees; 5) attempting to induce the client to withdraw the grievance; 6) failing to promptly respond to the client’s grievance; 7) failing to diligently represent a second client; 8) charging for work that respondent never performed and/or by failing to refund unearned fees; 9) failing to diligently represent a third client; 10) charging for work that respondent never performed; 11) failing to have any contact with the client after being hired; 12) failing to promptly respond to the client’s grievance.
Decision documents: Hearing Officer’s Decision; Disciplinary Board Order Declining Sua Sponte Review Consideration; and Washington Supreme Court Order.
Reprimanded
Gina Marie Guiley (WSBA No. 54521 admitted 2019) of Puyallup, was reprimanded, effective 9/06/2024, by order of the Washington Supreme Court imposing reciprocal discipline in accordance with an order of the Supreme Court of the State of California. For more information, see https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/226719. Henry Cruz acted as disciplinary counsel. Gina Marie Guiley represented themselves.
Decision document: The Washington Supreme Court Order.