Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Savage Love Letter of the Day | John Kerry... »

Friday, August 15, 2008

Bradley Marshall Is a Pussy

posted by on August 15 at 14:11 PM

And you can read all about it Blatherwatch, Hominid Views, and HA. Now I wouldn’t go so far as to call Marshall a vain, effete, caterwauling pussy, per Goldy, but I will, in solidarity with Blatherwatch, a local blog that Marshall is attempting to bully into pulling down an entirely legit blog post, join in calling Marshall a pussy.

You can read the original Blatherwatch blog about Marshall after the jump.

mike webb’s attorney no stranger to “dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation.”

A reader wrote BlatherWatch alerting us by saying: “Well, at least Mike Webb hired an attorney who has personal experience with fraudulent documentation.”

He or she sent us this link to a Bar Association Discipline Notice for Webb’s attorney, Bradley Marshall. Seems he was disciplined for violating rules of professional conduct (RPC’s) in 1997. There are many complaints filed against lawyers by consumers, but if they get as far as a Bar Association hearing and a reprimand, it’s a serious stain on an attorney’s record.

We’ll let you read it for yourself.

Discipline Notice
Effective Date: 3/27/1997
3.3 - Candor Toward the Tribunal
4.1 - Truthfulness in Statements to Others
5.3 - Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants
8.4 (a) - Violate the RPCs
8.4 (c) - Dishonesty, Fraud, Deceit or Misrepresentation
8.4 (d) - Conduct Prejudicial to the Administration of Justice

Bradley R. Marshall (WSBA No. 15830, admitted 1986), of Seattle, has been reprimanded pursuant to the Disciplinary Board’s March 27, 1997 order, entered after a disciplinary hearing. The discipline is based upon Marshall’s handling of a case in which he instructed a member of his office staff to sign two declarations without the declarants’ permission and to emulate the declarants’ signatures. Without making any notation that the declarants had not signed these declarations, Marshall filed these declarations with the court. These actions violated RPC 3.3 (a)(1) and (a)(4), RPC 4.1 (a), RPC 5.3, and RPC 8.4 (a), (c), and (d).
Marshall’s client’s case had been dismissed on a summary judgment motion in part because declarations submitted by the client and another witness were not in the proper form. Marshall had his staff prepare amended declarations for his client and the witness, so the declarations would meet the requirements of Civil Rule 56, but did not change the substance of two declarations previously signed by the declarants. He later instructed his staff to sign the two declarations and to emulate the signatures of his client and the witness. He knowingly filed the declarations with the false signatures in support of a motion for reconsideration of an order. There were no notations on the declarations to indicate that the declarants had not signed them, and Marshall did not inform opposing counsel or the judge that the declarants had not signed the declarations. Although Marshall directed his staff to improperly sign declarations, he would not accept personal responsibility for the improper signatures or submitting false information to the court.
The Hearing Officer was C. Bradford Cattle of Everett. Kurt Bulmer of Seattle represented the Respondent. Disciplinary Counsel Anne Seidel and Jean Kelley McElroy represented the Bar Association.

RSS icon Comments


you mean a scrotum, yes?

Posted by robo | August 15, 2008 2:35 PM

Bradley Marshall's last comment, about filing lawsuits today, was the best! I think the only person he forgot to threaten to sue were the people who read the posts.

Posted by Little Red Ryan Hood | August 15, 2008 2:53 PM

Robo nails it. Pussies are strong, they take a beating, spit out babies, etc. Scrotums (scrota?) are fragile and diaphanous.

Posted by minderbender | August 15, 2008 2:55 PM

deft touch using "caterwauling", very nice

Posted by jackseattle | August 15, 2008 3:04 PM

Let's see how your own record checks out. Aren't you a convicted door knob licker?

Posted by Just asking, Dapper Dan! | August 15, 2008 3:32 PM

@5 but I think Dan is proud of that, and doesn't threaten specious law suits given that he wrote about it and posted about it online himself.

Posted by vooodooo84 | August 15, 2008 3:51 PM

There is more recent news. I am a WSBA member and the following notice is in our July, 2008 Bar News:

"Bradley R. Marshall (WSBA No. 25103, admitted 1986)of Seattle was suspended pending the outcome of disciplinary proceedings pursuant to ELC 7.2(a)(2), effective May 1, 2008 by order of the Washington State Supreme Court. This is not a disciplinary action."

This means Marshall currently is suspended and cannot practice law (unless something has happened I don't know about.) I also have opposed Bradley several times in civil litigation and this action does not surprise me....

Posted by Adiabatic Man | August 15, 2008 4:38 PM

I got the bar number mixed up @7 by looking at the notice above his in the Bar News - Marshall's WSBA number is 15830. Everything else is accurate.

Posted by Adiabatic Man | August 15, 2008 4:43 PM

Man, FUCK lawyers.

Posted by Greg | August 16, 2008 10:02 AM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.