(The Center Square) – The Washington State Bar Association formally concluded an investigation into state Attorney General Nick Brown and dismissed a separate complaint against Solicitor General Noah Purcell hours after The Center Square reached out to the senior disciplinary counsel tasked with overseeing both.
The investigation against Brown was launched after a bar complaint was filed in response to an exclusive story by The Center Square. The investigation concerned Brown’s involvement in an amicus brief submitted by the AGO in support of private law firm Perkins Coie’s motion for a temporary restraining order against President Donald Trump cancelling the firm’s federal contracts.
Purcell, a former attorney at Perkins Coie who worked on the amicus brief, defended Brown in his bar complaint. As a result, the AGO has refused to release unredacted emails to The Center Square between the two regarding the bar complaint, on the basis that the communication is attorney-client privilege.
Earlier this week, The Center Square obtained an Aug. 29 letter via a public records request revealing that the WSBA initiated an investigation into Brown and assigned it to Senior Disciplinary Counsel Henry Cruz. The Center Square reached out to Cruz via phone to discuss the investigation and left a voicemail, but did not receive a response.
Shortly after the phone call, The Center Square reached out to the AGO for an interview with Brown.
Deputy Communications Director Mike Faulk wrote in an email that he was unavailable to discuss the investigation.
“As we’ve said many times before, this complaint is nonsense,” Faulk wrote. “When Donald Trump unconstitutionally targeted law firms whose work he disagrees with, our office worked with other attorneys general around the country to support those law firms via amicus briefs. A Washington resident who opposed our work, and who has a series of grievances against the AG’s Office going back years, decided to file a complaint with the Washington State Bar Association, alleging that the attorney general did something improper in filing the brief. That allegation is completely meritless. Our office will continue to stand up to defend the rule of law against Trump’s attacks. People are of course free to disagree with our work and to express that, but filing frivolous bar complaints is an abuse of the WSBA’s processes and a waste of public resources.”
Hours later, Cruz emailed both the AGO and the complainant with a letter signed that same day announcing that the investigation had been concluded and no further action would be taken.
Additionally, Cruz sent out a separate letter dismissing a complaint against Purcell for defending Brown.
According to the WSBA’s website, investigations occur after an inquiry has been made into a complaint filed against an attorney. After investigation, the disciplinary counsel may dismiss the grievance or recommend that a review committee of the Disciplinary Board order a hearing. The WSBA can also simply dismiss a complaint without first requiring a response by the attorney.
The WSBA has previously told The Center Square that it has no recollection of a prior inquiry into a sitting state attorney general. Unless the inquiry turns into a formal investigation, the records are destroyed after three years.
Earlier this year, a bar complaint was filed against Brown for the amicus brief, which failed to disclose that the AGO had active contracts with Perkins Coie. In response, the WSBA sent Brown via his executive assistant Angie Adams a letter demanding he respond to the allegations. Adams, who is listed as Brown’s contact info on the WSBA’s website, wrote in an email obtained by The Center Square that she was on vacation when the letter was sent to her and did not see it until six weeks later and after the deadline set by the WSBA.
The WSBA then sent a follow up letter threatening to suspend Brown’s license to practice law if he didn’t respond by July 17. Almost a month later, Brown hadn’t responded, but eventually did so via Purcell the day after The Center Square reached out to the WSBA regarding its inquiry into Brown.
When The Center Square requested communications between Purcell and Brown regarding the bar complaint, the AGO turned over redacted emails claiming they were exempt from public disclosure under attorney-client privilege. The Center Square appealed the decision, noting that the AGO cannot legally represent or provide legal counsel or advice to individuals in private matters. The AGO denied the appeal, claiming that the AGO could defend Brown under RCW 43.10.040, which gives them the authority to defend state employees in the following: “all administrative tribunals or bodies of any nature, in all legal or quasi legal matters, hearings, or proceedings, and advise all officials, departments, boards, commissions, or agencies of the state in all matters involving legal or quasi legal questions, except those declared by law to be the duty of the prosecuting attorney of any county.”
That statute was also cited by Purcell in his response to the WSBA complaint filed against him.
When The Center Square reached out to the WSBA regarding whether its inquiries fall within this statute, Chief Communications and Outreach Officer Sara Niegowski wrote that “as a practice, we can’t take informal positions on legal issues and or issue law interpretations.”
In his letter dismissing the complaint against Purcell, Cruz wrote that “in light of this broad language, grievances investigated by ODC appear to fall within the statute.”
Aside from defending Brown, the bar complaint filed against alleged Purcell communicated with Perkins Coie without its attorney’s consent. According to emails obtained by The Center Square via public records, Perkins Coie’s attorney Williams & Connolly were not included in the communications with their client, and neither the AGO nor Williams and Connolly would comment on whether their consent was granted.
A provision in Washington state’s Rule of Professional Conduct is “Communication with Person Represented by Counsel,” which states the following: “In representing a client, a lawyer shall not communicate about the subject of the representation with a person the lawyer knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized to do so by law or a court order.”
In his letter dismissing the bar complaint against, Cruz wrote that “here, neither Purcell nor the AGO was representing a party in Perkins Coie; instead, the AGO filed an amicus brief in support of Perkins Coie. Moreover, the communications here do not appear to implicate any of the concerns the rule is meant to address.”
The Center Square reached out to former state attorney general Rob McKenna for comment on the WSBA investigation, but he was unable to comment due to ongoing client matters with the AGO.
The Center Square also reached out to former state attorney general Gov. Bob Ferguson for comment, but did not receive a response by time of publication.
